ࡱ> Y[TUVWX5@ Mbjbj22 'NXX3&&&&8&l2'&?j'("2(2(2()))>>>>>>>$@RB>) ))))>2(2(>,,,)2(2(>,)>, ,-*;hf<2(' ~.&*N;<>0?;Ce+BC f<Cf< ,)))>>&&!*$d,L&&*$THE STATE OF PROBABILITY MEASUREMENT IN MATHEMATICS EDUCATION: A FIRST APPROXIMATION Egan J Chernoff  HYPERLINK "mailto:egan_chernoff@sfu.ca" egan_chernoff(at)sfu.ca ABSTRACT In this article the three dominant philosophical interpretations of probability in mathematics education (classical, frequentist, and subjective) are critiqued. Probabilistic explorations of the debate over whether classical probability is belief-type or frequency-type probability will bring forth the notion that common ranges, rather than common points, of philosophical reference are inherent to probability measurement. In recognition of this point, refinement of subjective probability, into the dual classification of intrasubjective and intersubjective, and frequentist probability into the dual classification of artefactual and formal objective, attempts to address the nomenclatural issues inherent to subjective and frequentist probability being both general classifiers and particular theories. More specifically, adoption of artefactual and intersubjective probability will provide a more nuanced framework for the field to begin to heed the numerous calls put forth over the last twenty-five years for a unified approach to teaching and learning probability. Furthermore, the article proposes that artefactual period be adopted as a first approximation descriptor for the next phase of probability education. Introduction Jones, Langrall, and Mooneys (2007) probability chapter in the Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (Lester, 2007) states: With respect to probability content, the big ideas that have emergedare the nature of chance and randomness, sample space, probability measurement (classical, frequentist, and subjective), and probability distributions (p. 915). Further examination of the authors synthesis of (worldwide) curricula and current research in the field, coupled with a strict emphasis on the probability measurement perspective, provides evidence that the big ideas that have emerged in mathematics education are the classical and frequentist approaches to probability measurement, and not the subjective approach. This author does not disagree with Jones, Langrall, and Mooneys point that with respect to probability content subjective probability is a big idea; rather, this author contends that the big idea has yet to emerge. For example, subjective probability is not widely represented in mathematics curricula (p. 947), and the authors were not able to locate cognitive research on the subjective approach to probability (p. 925). The profundity of these statements is in their simplicity. In accord with these recent findings, the purpose of this paper is to (1) critique nomenclature associated with probability measurement in mathematics education, and (2) investigate the current state of subjective probability. Probability measurement literature exists in the fields of: philosophy (Gillies, 2000; Hacking, 1975, 2001), psychology (Coshmides & Tooby, 1996; Gigerenzer, 1994, 1996; Kahneman & Tversky, 1982; Tversky & Kahneman 1982a, 1982b), mathematics (Davis & Hersh, 1986), and mathematics education (Batanero, Henry, & Parzysz, 2005; Borovcnik, Benz, & Kapadia, 1991; Brousseau, Brousseau, & Warfield, 2002; Garfield & Ahlgren, 1988; Hawkins & Kapadia, 1984; Konold, 1989, 1991; Konold, Pollatsek, Well, Lohmeier & Lipson, 1993; Shaughnessy, 1992). Despite the literature presented, the state of probability measurement, this author contends, is in crisis. Reason being: Despite the variety of research, the common thread of nomenclatural issues is persistent, independent of academic field chosen. Thus, the theory of probability, which attempts to quantify the notion of probable, has developed (to its detriment) a number of concurrent definitions. In an attempt to critique these concurrent definitions this paper will employ and elaborate upon the idea that a dual classification of interpretations of probability has been a feature of discussion of foundations of the subject since the 1840s (Gillies, 2000, p. 19). While the analysis of dual classifications will provide the framework for discussion on probability measurement taxonomy, consideration of how others have influenced the current state of probability measurement within mathematics education will be addressed. This dualistic exploration begins with a preliminary examination of the state of probability measurement in the field of mathematics education. Next, the examination turns to a philosophical investigation of probability measurement. Finally, the examination returns to how mathematics educators have influenced, and are influencing, the topic. After the state of probability measurement in mathematics education is discussed, this article will focus on the subjective notion of probability measurement, its nomenclature, and its inherent influences from the field of psychology. The synthesis of internal and external influences, past and present, will abet conjectures about the inevitable emergence of these big ideas, and how (and if it will) influence probability beyond Phase 3, the Contemporary Period (Jones & Thornton, 2005, p.66). It will be contended that current probability measurement nomenclature used in mathematics education: (1) be further refined in order to reflect foundational philosophical issues, (2) adopt new expressions to more accurately describe the state of probability measurement in mathematics education, and (3) name phase 4 in probability education the artefactual (Gillies, 2000) period. Probability Measurement Nomenclature in Mathematics Education Certain authors in the fields of psychology (Coshmides & Tooby, 1996), philosophy (Hacking, 2001) and mathematics education (Batanero, Henry, & Parzysz, 2005) present in depth analyses on probability measurement, and are recommended to the reader. Within mathematics education, probability measurement is categorized into, but not restricted to, three different philosophical interpretations: classical, frequentist, and subjective. Despite this probability measurement trinity, textbooks concerned with teaching and learning of probability focus on the classical and frequentist interpretations.  figure 1. dual classification: classical & frequentist probabilities This dual classification in mathematics education (seen in figure 1) is derived from an epistemological division between empiricism and rationalism. For those who espouse rationalist philosophy, attainment of knowledge is the product of pure reasontruths are deduced a priori in the mind; however, for those who espouse empiricist philosophy, knowledge is based upon sensory perceptiontheory is built inductively. The classical interpretation of probability is deemed a priori probability because of its alignment with the rationalist perspective. Probabilities are calculated deductively without the need to conduct an experiment. However, what is not possible a priori is possible a posteriori. As such, the frequentist interpretation of probability is rendered a posteriori probability, and is aligned with the empiricist perspective where we know about things. In this context, one relies on their senses and sense perception in order to gain knowledgerather than just relying on the discovery of what were deemed a priori truths. Moreover, while rationalists focus on deductive reasoning, empiricists focus on inductive reasoning based upon sensory perceptions. Not explicitly placed within this dual classification in mathematics education is the third member of the probability measurement trinity, subjective probability. Subjective probability describes probability as a degree of belief, based upon personal judgment and information about an outcome. (Jones, Langrall, & Mooney, 2007). Based upon this definition it is no longer assumed that all rational human beings with the same evidence will have the same degree of belief in a hypothesis (Gillies, 2000, p. 1). Moreover, and foreshadowing a future dual classification, probability is not objective in the material sense; probabilities are in the subjects mind (Jeffrey, 2004). The lack of explicit placement of subjective probabilities as a priori or the a posteriori definition of probability implies the state of subjective probability is a topic for debate; or, alternatively stated, there are probabilities associated with subjective probability being a priori or a posteriori probability. That being said, a number of different names have been given to describe subjective probability. Moreover, the classical and frequentist interpretations of probability are also not immune from a variety of names. Given that this can be a source of confusion, alternative names associated with each of the probability measurements are presented in table 1. ClassicalFrequentistSubjectivea prioria posterioriBayesianTheoreticalEmpiricalIntuitiveExperimentalPersonalObjectiveIndividualtable 1. mathematics education probability measurement nomenclature Having provided some semblance to probability measurement terminology in mathematics education, attention is now turned to an examination of probability measurement from a philosophical perspective. Probability Measurement Nomenclature in Probability Theory The nomenclatural issues that exist in mathematics education also exist in probability theory. Moreover, in most part the issues seen in mathematics education are derived from issues in probability theory. As mentioned, this paper will adopt the theme of dual classification as a framework for analysis of the state of subjective probability and probability measurement within probability theory. Providing a clearer picture of the philosophical underpinnings of probability measurement will attempt to provide a clearer picture of probability measurement in mathematics education. To begin this process the dual classification of a mathematical aspect and a philosophical aspect of probability is presented. The theory of probability has a mathematical aspect and a foundational or philosophical aspect. There is a remarkable contrast between the two. While an almost complete consensus and agreement exists about the mathematics, there is a wide divergence of opinions about the philosophy. With a few exceptions [] all probabilists accept the same set of axioms for the mathematical theory, so that they all agree about what are the theorems (Gillies, 2000, p.1). This essential distinction between the mathematical and philosophical aspects of probability recognizes the notion that probability can be developed axiomatically, independent of interpretation. Hawkins and Kapadia (1984) present this notion as formal probability; and, furthermore, state that, the probability is calculated precisely using the mathematical laws of probability (p. 349). However, they do resign to mention that the mathematical basis for formal probability might be among the classical and frequentist probabilityperhaps in an acknowledgment to the notion of independent of interpretation. Nevertheless, the first of the dual classifications within probability theory exists between the mathematical aspect the philosophical aspect, and is shown in figure 2.  figure 2. dual classification: mathematical and philosophical aspects For many individuals, including those not well versed in probability theory, formal probability (i.e., the mathematical agreement on axioms and theories) is subsumed by the classical interpretation of probability measurement. Chernoff (2007) denotes this lack of recognition between the mathematical and philosophical (or theoretical) aspects of probability as the Monistic Probabilistic Perspective, or MPP. Furthermore, Chernoff contends that although this monism may be acceptable when engaged in everyday discourse, using the word probability within an academic field requires the definition be more rigorous. In recognition of this point, the examination now turns to dual classifications within the philosophical aspect of probability. While Gillies (2000) presents a crucial distinction between the mathematical and philosophical aspect of probability, a second dual classification, solely within the philosophical aspect of probability is presented by Hacking (1975): [P]robabilityis Janus-faced. On the one side it is statistical, concerning itself with stochastic laws of chance processes. On the other side it is epistemological, dedicated to assessing reasonable degrees of belief in propositions quite devoid of statistical background (p. 12). Similar to the MPP (i.e., a lack of recognition between the mathematical and philosophical aspects of probability), Hacking (2001) points out an analogous lack of recognition, solely within the domain of probability theory. He notes that until presented with the distinction between belief-type and frequency-type probabilities, the two are used interchangeably. More poignantly, Hacking points out that the dual classification, once recognized, of these two disparate ideas must be distinguished between; and the distinction is essentialfor all clear thinking about probability (p. 127). In line with this point of view, the distinction between belief-type and frequency-type probabilities is presented in figure 3.  figure 3. dual classification: belief-type and frequency-type probabilities Gillies (2000) points out that while this fundamental dual classification is recognized, and agreed upon by a large number of probability philosophers, what is not agreed upon is the nomenclature of these two groups. Similarly, Hacking (2001) points out the absurdity associated with how many names have been applied to the interpretations (see, for example, p. 133). Despite this recognition by both individuals, and, moreover, case in point: Gillies (2000) uses epistemological (or epistemic) and objective as names for this fundamental distinction, while Hacking (2001) uses belief-type probability and frequency-type probability; the latter of which will be adopted by this paper. A list of the more common names associated with this dual classification is presented in table 2. Belief-type probabilityFrequency-type probabilitySubjectiveObjectiveEpistemicAleatorynumber 1number 2epistemological (or epistemic)Objectivetable 2. probability theory probability measurement nomenclature. Given that the classification issue has been touched upon, attention now turns to reasons for the dual classification into belief-type and frequency-type probabilities. The notion of objectivity will be used to show (1) the difference between belief-type and frequency-type probabilities, and (2) present further dual classifications within each of the two types of probability. In the dual classification of probabilities, into belief-type and frequency-type, the word objective is used in a material sense. Alternatively stated, use of the term objective takes probability to be a feature of the objective material world, which has nothing to do with human knowledge or belief (Gillies, 2000, p.2). Thus, when dealing with the frequency-type interpretation of probability, one is talking about some physical property of say, for example, a coin. On the other hand, belief-type probabilities are concerned with the knowledge or belief of human beings. On this approach probability measures degree of knowledge, degree of rational belief, degree of belief, or something of this sort (p.2). Thus, when dealing with belief-type probabilities one must recognize that probabilities are in the mind of the subject. In essence, this dual classification is based upon a distinction between mind and matter; this notion should be treated as a means of classification, rather than a sacrosanct philosophical statement made by the author. As Hacking (2001) notes, within the frequency-type interpretation of probability, a further dual classification between propensity theory and frequency theory can also be made. If an individual is to discuss the physical characteristics of a coin, then that individual needs to conduct some sort of experiment, such as spinning the coin. In doing so, statements made about the physical property of interest can be basic (e.g., the coin comes up heads more than it does tails), or the statement about the coin can be more specific (e.g., the relative frequency of heads is seven to ten); the basic statement is associated with the propensity theory, while the other more specific statement is associated with the frequency theory. As touched upon earlier, a second use of the word objectivity (i.e., objectivity, but not in the material sense) can be helpful in distinguishing the dual classification within frequency-type probability, and show that frequency theory is more objective than propensity theory. For example, saying that a head is more likely than a tail has more of an element of subjectivity (i.e., more likely by how much?) than saying, for example, the frequency of spinning a heads is seven to ten. As such, the author claims that there exists an element of objectivity solely within the frequency-type probability. Alternatively stated, within frequency-type probability (i.e., probability based upon objectivity in the material sense), there exists a further element of objectivity, which helps distinguish the further dual classification between propensity theory (being less objective) and frequency theory. Similar to the distinction within frequency-type probability, Hacking (2001) notes that a further distinction between personal probabilities and interpersonal (p. 32) probabilities can be made within belief-type probability. For example, consider the following statement: It is probable that I am taking the bus to work tomorrow. The degree to which an individual believes in the proposition can be personal (e.g., I am probably going to take the bus tomorrow), or can be interpersonal (e.g., in light of all the snow on the ground, I am probably going to take the bus tomorrow). The latter example, based upon evidence, or logical connections is associated with the interpersonal belief-type probability, while the former example is associated with personal belief-type probability. Again, a second use of the word objectivity (i.e., not in the material sense) can be employed to: show varying degrees of objectivity within belief-type probability, aid in the dual classification between personal and interpersonal probabilities, and provide contention that interpersonal belief-type probability is more objective than personal belief-type probability. Given that interpersonal belief-type probability is based upon relative evidence, and individuals, if given the same evidence, can arrive at the same degree of belief (which is further contended in the theory), a sense of objectivity is implied. The personal theory, on the other hand, does not have to be based upon evidence, or logic, and allows for individuality within belief-type probabilities. In other words, given the same type of evidence, personal probability accounts for individuals having differing degrees of belief in a proposition. As such, there exists less of an element of objectivity (i.e., more subjectivity) within the subjectivity, and this varying degree of objectivity within belief-type probability leads to the further dual classification between personal probability (as being less objective) and interpersonal probability. The analysis of probability theory has produced the dual distinctions of: (1) belief-type probability and frequency-type probability, (2) propensity theory and frequency theory (within frequency-type probability), and (3) personal and interpersonal probability (within belief-type probability). While these dual classifications are shown in figure 4, it is important to note (as it will not be pictured) that these dual classifications were derived from a dual classification themselves: objectivity in a material sense and objectivity in a non-material sense. Gillies (2000) notes, this non-material sense of objectivity in the belief-type probabilitiesand this author contends in the frequency-type probabilitiesconsiders the objectivity associated with probability interpretations as in a Platonic sense. For example, some regard probability interpretations as existing in a kind of Platonic world whose contents can be intuited by the human mind. Thus, this kind of theory, though epistemological, takes probabilities to be in some sense objective (p. 20).  figure 4. dual classifications of probability theory The dual classifications into: mathematics and theory, mind and matter, personal and interpersonal probability, and propensity and frequency probability have created a framework too distinct for the nature of the discussion. The state of the philosophical aspect of classical probability will be examined in order to blur the lines. More specifically, the question of whether classical probability should be categorized, as a belief-type or frequency-type probability will be addressed. Interestingly: On this point there is room for some debate (Gillies, 2000, p.20). Given the exact position of classical probability is up for debate, the positioning of classical probability within the dual classifications presented will be argued probabilistically. The author contends that the forthcoming probabilities are personal belief-type probabilities, and leaves the question of whether or not interpersonal belief-type probability could apply instead up to the reader. Through quasi-polysyllogistic reasoning (and perhaps through polysyllogistic reasoning, although not attempted), the classical interpretation of probability is more likely to be a belief-type probability, than a frequency-type probability. Reason being: The classical interpretation of probability is also known as a priori probabilitya priori probabilities are those probabilities that can be intuited by the human mindprobabilities that are associated with the mind are belief-type probabilities. Therefore, it can be deduced that the classical interpretation is a belief-type probability. However, instead of claiming that classical probability is a belief-type probability, this author contends that classical probability is more likely to be a belief-type probability than a frequency-type probability. Given that the notion of classical probability can be seen as more likely to be a belief-type probability, the next step is to determine whether it is more likely to be a personal or interpersonal belief-type probability. The author contends that due to the Platonic sense of objectivity associated with classical probability: within belief-type probability, classical probability is more closely aligned with the interpersonal belief-type probability, rather than personal belief-type probability. As such, the author further contends that it is more likely that classical probability is an interpersonal belief-type probability, rather than a personal belief-type probability. While the argument has been made that it is likely that classical probability is an interpersonal belief-type probability, one point, that has not been taken into consideration in the probabilistic argument presented above, is that classical probability may exist in a state in the midst of belief-type and frequency-type probabilities, which harkens to the notion that the classification of probabilities has been done in too rigid a manner. While the debate over whether or not classical probability is belief-type or frequency-type probability has not come to any definitive conclusion, nor was it expected to, what has been concluded is that a continuous spectrum, or range, with overlapping states, rather than discrete positions, is, perhaps, a more appropriate framework for investigation of probability measurement in probability theory, as shown in figure 5.  figure 5. the range associated classical probability placement While the mathematical aspect of probability has a solid foundation, the philosophical aspect of probability, as shown, is burdened with fundamental epistemological issues (e.g., rationalist and empiricist, and objectivity). Within this disarray that is probability theory, analyzing dual classifications has aided in obtaining a clearer picture of the philosophy of probability. Furthermore, the debate over the relative positioning of classical probability has exposed the idea that recognition of a spectrum, or range, for analyzing the state of probability measurement, rather than discrete distinctions is more appropriate. Shaughnessy (1992) notes, different epistemological traditions in philosophy have led to different research traditions[and] there is not a common point of philosophical reference in the research community (p. 468). Perhaps ranges of philosophical reference in probability measurement are more appropriate than points. Given the current trend, in both probability and statistics education, of dealing with ranges rather than points, this notion of a range of philosophical reference seems quite apropos. With an awareness of the philosophical issues inherent to probability measurement, the field of mathematics education is revisited. Probability Measurement Nomenclature in Mathematics Education: Revisited We are saddled with considerable baggage, both philosophical and historical, which can provide obstacles not only to our research in learning probabilitybut also our very ability to communicate results to other researchers (Shaughnessy, 1992, p. 467). Given the examination of the state of probability measurement, Shaughnessys point is well taken. Nevertheless, probability measurementwith a specific focus on the state of subjective probabilitywithin the field of mathematics education is reexamined employing the strategy of looking at dual classifications, as a starting point. In both the probability theory and mathematics education sections (and as was shown in table 1 and table 2) there is rich vocabulary in each field. Thus, attempting to align vocabulary between the two fields is an important aside to take, and is done so in table 3. Mathematics EducationProbability Theoryclassical, a priori, theoreticalclassical, a priori, theoreticalfrequentist, a posteriori, empirical, experimental, objectivefrequency-type, a posteriori, objective, propensity, frequencysubjective, Bayesian, intuitive, personal, individualbelief-type, subjective, epistemic, personal, interpersonaltable 3. aligning probability measurement vocabulary Emboldened in the table above is the terminology adopted by this paper to act as a communicational bridge between the fields of mathematics education and probability theory. Classical, frequentist, and subjective probability from mathematics education will correspond to classical, frequency-type, and belief-type probability in probability theory, respectively. The further distinctions of propensity and frequency, within frequency-type, and personal and interpersonal, within belief-type, probability do not have counterparts in mathematics education; but, counterparts in the field of mathematics education will be proposed in the paper, once the dual classifications in the field are examined further. Thus, for the moment, frequentist will align with both the propensity and frequency theories, subjective will align with both the personal and interpersonal theories, and their lack of counterparts will be symbolic of a first glimpse into the state of probability measurement in mathematics education. It should also be noted that the vocabulary alignment of the two fields does not imply that there no longer exist any nomenclatural issues, or are in a point to point correspondence (as evidenced by a lack of counterparts). In fact, and for example, as long as the definition of frequency-type probability has frequency as one of its theories, issues will remain. Nevertheless, this preliminary alignment allows the examination of dual classifications in mathematics education to commence. In order to get an accurate, and timely, portrayal of the major dual classification of probability measurement in probability education, we look, once again, to Jones, Langrall, and Mooneys (2007) synthesis of probability research. A number of specific instances provide a suggestion for the major dual classification in probability measurement within mathematics education. For example: Each of the three countries also incorporated elements of both the frequentistand the classical approaches to probability measurement (p. 912); The strongest feature in all three middle school curricula is the focus on both the classical and the frequentist approaches to probability (p. 913); The emphasis is almost totally on classical (theoretical) and frequentist (experimental) approaches to probability measurement (p. 914); research on probability measurement has focused largely on the classical approach with some recent research beginning to emerge on the frequentist approach (p. 925); Experimental Probability, Theoretical Probability and Sample Size (pp. 928-929); Based upon the support presented above, it appears that the dominant fundamental distinction, in terms of probability measurement, in the field of mathematics education is between the classical and frequentist interpretations of probability, as seen in figure 1 (on p. 4). However, given the discussion of probability theory, we see that the dual classification into classical and frequentist is no longer as stark as it first appeared in the initial visit to probability measurement in mathematics education. Based upon the work within probability theory, the notion of frequentist probability possesses a further distinction, and the placement of classical probability is up for debate. Thus, the dual classification between classical and frequentist is now seen as a dual classification between (1) a more refined definition of frequency-type probability and (2) the unknown position of classical probability as frequency-type, or belief-type probability, or somewhere in between. The implicit state of classical probability theory in mathematics education is investigated first. Instead of inflexible claims as one or the other, probabilistic claims as to where the classical notion of probability should be situated will be considered. Again, the author contends that the probabilities are measured through personal belief-type probabilities, and leaves the question of whether or not interpersonal belief-type probability could apply instead, up to the reader. Based upon the earlier quasi-polysyllogistic argument presented in the probability theory section, there is a better chance that classical probability is subjective probability, rather than frequentist probability. Some interpret may interpret this statement as a rather bold claim. In actuality, the statement is made to bring forth the view that the probability measurement terminology in mathematics education is inadequate, which is a rather bold claim in itself. The debate over the placement of the classical interpretation of probability as either frequency-type or belief-type in probability theory converts to a debate over the placement of the classical (i.e., a priori) interpretation of probability as either frequentist (i.e., a posteriori) or subjective in mathematics education. Moreover, and temporarily, the argument is inhibited by a lack of counterparts to further distinctions utilized within probability theory. For example, based upon definitions of subjective probability found in mathematics education (e.g., Borovcnik, Bentz, & Kapadia, 1991; Hawkins, & Kapadia, 1984; Jones, Langrall, & Mooney, 2007), claiming classical probability is subjective probability implies that classical probability is aligned with personal belief-type probability. However, this is not what the author is claiming.  figure 6. mathematics education overlapped with probability theory As shown in figure 6, the debate over whether classical probability is subjective or frequentist (i.e., belief-type or frequency-type) is less nuanced than when the debate occurred using the further dual classifications found with probability theory terminology. In other words, when the claim is made that classical probability is more likely to be subjective than frequentist, the distinction between the personal belief-type and the interpersonal belief-type probability is not taken into consideration, at least explicitly. Similarly, when considering whether classical probability is frequentist probability, the distinction between propensity and frequency theory is not taken into consideration. Moreover, and in both cases, the order that is inherent to the subjective, and frequentist probability is ignored. Thus, while the possible range of classical probability (from interpersonal belief-type to propensity frequency-type) still exists in the present argument, the current terminology associated with mathematics education only allows for classical probability to be posited between, or as one of, subjective probability and frequentist probability; and not to be rightfully expressed between, or as one of, an objective notion of subjective probability (i.e., interpersonal belief-type probability) and a subjective notion of frequentist probability (i.e., propensity frequency-type probability). Now that the first notion derived from the dual classification has been examined (i.e., the debate over classical notion of probability), attention now turns to addressing the further refined frequentist notion of probability in mathematics education. The more nuanced dual classification of frequentist probability brings forth the notion of an objective range to frequentist probability. Within the domain of frequency-type probabilities, propensity-type probabilities are considered more subjective than frequency frequency-type probabilities; and, moreover, the notion of increased objective objectivity is derived from less human involvement associated with the objectivity (e.g., personal probabilistic ranges associated with talking about one side of a coin being more likely than another, and personal involvement in an experiment). Even though the frequentist side of the major dual classification in mathematics education is now more nuanced, and the frequentist notion more aligned with propensity than with frequency frequency-type probabilities, the objective subtlety that exists is unable to be taken into account because of current mathematics education probability measurement terminology. More specifically, the lack of nomenclatural counterparts to propensity and frequency theory in mathematics education do not allow for the major dual classification between classical and a more subjective notion of frequentist probability, to be rightfully described. Based upon the argument presented, mathematics educations dual classification between classical and frequentist probability, when further examined, is a dual classification falling somewhere within the range between inter-personal belief-type probability to propensity frequency-type probability, according to probability theory terminology. However, according to mathematics education terminology at present, the dual classification is defined between classical and frequentist probability, as shown in figure 7. Taking liberties with the mathematics education terminology, the dual classification is between an objective notion of classical probability and a subjective notion of frequentist probability.  figure 7. revisited dual classification of classical probability in mathematics education While it has been argued that the classical notion of probability is belief-type probability, the very notion that the argument is probabilistic implies that there is a possibility that classical probability is not interpersonal belief-type probability. Moreover, given the range associated with classical probability the notion that classical probability exists between belief-type and frequency-type probabilities is now entertained, and there exists sufficient reason to do so. While the dual classification into classical and frequentist interpretations is abundant in the literature, the connection between the two is also starting to gain momentum. Cases of this are found in Jones, Langrall, and Mooney (2007). For example: the curricula highlight the determination of theoretical and experimental probabilities and also foreshadow the relationship between the two (p.913); set the scene for an examination of recent research that focuses more explicitly on experimental probability measurement and the relationship between experimental probability, theoretical probability and sample size (p. 925); Students Conceptions of Theoretical and Experimental Probability (pp. 946-947); This connection between the classical and frequentist notions, which is further described as a connection between objective subjective (i.e., belief-type) probability and subjective frequentist (i.e., frequency-type) probability, has philosophical underpinnings that provide evidence for the placement of classical probability as existing between the two notions. The following is found in a translation of Platos allegory of the divided line and is related to the lower section of the intelligible world: the use of visible diagrams and models as imperfect illustrations of the objects and truths of pure thought. Here is a sort of bridge carrying the mind across from the visible thing to the intelligible reality, which it must learn to distinguish (Cornford, 1966, p. 223). Given that cognitive research under the rubric of classical and frequentist probability is a key endeavor for the next period (Jones, Langrall, & Mooney, 2007, p. 947), the positioning of classical probability, while still a matter of debate, based upon the points presented is posited in its tacit position between subjective and frequentist, to use mathematics education terminology. Now that the debate over classical probability is replete with critique over placement, whether it is a range or more specific, the issue surrounding the further distinctions of propensity and frequency within frequency-type probability, and the lack of counterparts in mathematics education is addressed. While a further distinction for frequentist probability in mathematics education will allow for a more in depth analysis, it can be argued that the same nomenclatural issues are still present one level further in the argument. In other words, the dual classification of propensity and frequency type probability is nothing more than another dual classification, and the rigidity issues of the framework still persist. Such is the nature of dual classification. For example, the notion of a range or spectrum of objective objectivity within the propensity and frequency frequency-type interpretations had to be explicitly discussed even though the terminology was further refined. In (1) attempting to better represent the debate over classical probability, (2) keeping with the historical theme of dual classification, and (3) attempting to provide more of a focus on the range associated with notion of objectivity within the frequentist interpretation, the author contends that the dual classification within frequentist probability for mathematics education occur between artefactual probability and formal objective probability. Gillies (2000) notion of artefactual probability is where probabilities can be considered as existing in the material world and so as being objective, but they are the result of interaction between humans and nature (p. 179). The notion of artefactual probability better encompasses, the debate on classical probability as existing in the range between objective subjective probability (philosophically seen as interpersonal belief-type) and subjective frequentist probability (philosophically seen as propensity frequency-type), and does so by providing sorely needed terminology for probability measurement in mathematics education. Also, the definition is more conducive to explaining the range of objectivity within frequentist probability, where objectivity is based on the interaction of humans and nature, and where more interaction whether physical or other implies less objectivity. Perhaps most importantly, this definition is chosen because it can be used as a theoretical framework for the impending focus on research concerning the relationship between classical and frequentist probability. On the other hand, formal objective probabilities will be presented as those that are independent of humansto the greatest extent that they can be. Thus, while a dual classification has been presented, the classification can be seen as a broad spectrum (artefactual probability) and a more narrowly defined point (formal objective). In using artefactual and formal objective, the notion of objectiveness within objectivity can be addressed, and, further, is presented as increased objectivity when moving from artefactual probability to the notion of formal objective probability. These definitions are incorporated into figure 8.  figure 8. artefactual and formal objective probability As shown in the revisit to probability measurement nomenclature in mathematics education, even though a dual classification can be made, issues of terminology associated with further refinements in a definition, and a debate over probability categorization requires careful analysis. Nevertheless, frequentist probability and classical probability have been posited. As such, attention turns tothe debateover subjective probability. Subjective Probability According to Jones, Langrall, & Mooneys (2007) synthesis, this author argues that the state of subjective probability is, interestingly, subjective. For example: Some evidencesuggests that children can use knowledge of beliefs about levels of confidence in dealing with subjective probability (p. 913); With respect to subjective probability, the Australian and United Kingdom documents relate it to social contexts (p. 913); only the Australian document alludes to subjective probability (p. 914); The area of subjective probability is more problematic. Even though it is commonly used by people in everyday reasoning, the fact is that it is not widely represented in mathematics curricula means that there is less immediate interest on the part of researchers to investigate this aspect of probability measurement (p. 947). While researchers in mathematics education are cognizant of the proper definition of subjective probability, and while a unified definition for subjective probability exists, the author contends that there is no unified definition for subjective probability in mathematics education; and, moreover, there exists a multitude of reasons for this occurrence. In line with this point of view, subjective probability in mathematics education is explored. As noted, in probability theory, as in mathematics education, whether classical probability is a subjective or frequentist interpretation is a matter for debate. Similarly, in mathematics education the notion of the subjective interpretation is up for debate as well, i.e., the area of subjective probability is more problematic (Jones, Langrall, & Mooney, 2007, p. 947). However, and further complicating the issue, the debate over subjective probability is encompassed within the debate over classical probability. In other words, the state of subjective probability will be dependent upon the state that is associated with the classical notion of probability. However, this is not the only issue associated with the state of subjective probability in mathematics education. The state of subjective probability in mathematics education is not only influenced by philosophical underpinnings, but by the field of psychology, as well. More specifically, [t]he research of psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tverskyhas provided mathematics educators with a theoretical framework for researching learning in probability (Shaughnessy, 1992, p. 470). Their use of the word subjective probability is as follows: We use the term subjective probability to denote any estimate of the probability of an event, which is given by a subject, or inferred from his behavior. These estimates are not assumed to satisfy any axioms of consistency requirements. We use the term objective probability to denote values calculated, on the basis of stated assumptions, according to the laws of the probability calculus. It should be evident that this terminology is noncommittal with respect to any philosophical view of probability (Tversky & Kahneman, 1982, p. 32, this authors bolding). The state of subjective probability in mathematics education is based upon (1) the relative positioning based on the debate over whether classical probability is subjective or frequentist, and (2) a stance noncommittal to any philosophical interpretation of probability. In order to begin an exploration of the state of subjective probability, the rigidity of the nomenclature used must first be addressed. For now, the further distinction into personal belief-type and interpersonal belief-type probability will be adopted. Based upon the discussion of the state of classical probability existing as either interpersonal belief-type or somewhere between interpersonal belief-type and artefactual frequency-type, would imply that there is a better chance (measured subjectively as before, and with the same question for the reader applying) that subjective probability is personal belief-type probability than interpersonal belief-type probability. This claim takes into account the objectivity inherent to probabilitieswhere personal belief-type probabilities are less objective than interpersonal belief-type probabilities, but, nevertheless, are subjective. Furthermore, based upon the subjective probability definition from the field of psychology, subjective probability is denoted as one given by a subject, which would imply that there is a better chance the state of subjective probability is personal rather than interpersonal. Both points are put forth to assert that the state of subjective probability in mathematics education is better described as personal subjective (i.e., belief-type) probability. Examination of definitions of subjective probability lends credence to this claim. For example: subjective probability, describes probability as a degree of belief, based upon personal judgment and information about an outcome (Jones, Langrall, & Mooney, 2007, p. 913); In this subjective view, what is random for one person might be nonrandom for anothera degree of uncertainty specific for each person (Batanero, Henry, & Parzysz, 2005, p. 24); The basic assumption here is that subjects have their own probabilities which are derived from an implicit preference pattern between decisions (Borovcnik, Bentz, & Kapadia, 1991, p. 41); to a greater of lesser extent the probability is an expression of personal belief or perception (Hawkins, & Kapadia, 1984, p. 349). According to the definitions, the notion of subjective probability, while not distinguished between personal or interpersonal in mathematics education, has a greater chance of meaning personal subjective probability. However, if the terminology adopted does not exist in the field of mathematics education, the subtlety may remain unaddressed. As such, and as presented with the frequentist probability refinement in mathematics education, the probability measurement terminology of subjective probability that exists in mathematics education can also be further nuanced, and in doing so will, arguably, include a number of benefits. A further nuanced definition of the subjective interpretation will allow for a more appropriate placement of classical probability between subjective or frequentist probability, and align with the implicit definition of classical probability where people regard probability relations as existing in a kind of Platonic world whose contents can be intuited by the human mind. Thus, this kind of theory, though epistemological takes probabilities to be in some sense objective (Gillies, 2000, p. 20). Directly related to this more refined placement of classical probability, the objectivity associated with subjective probabilities will also be able to be addressed, i.e., whether or not the subjective probability being discussed is more closely aligned to personal or interpersonal subjective probability. Further, relative positioning inherent to the subjective debate being based on the classical debate will be able to be addressed. For example, if classical probability is more likely to lie solely in the range of interpersonal subjective probability then subjective probability will more likely lie in personal subjective probability; however, if classical probability is more likely to be considered to be placed between the interpersonal belief-type and artefactual frequentist-type, more objectivity in the personal belief-type probability will be able to be entertained. Consideration of what the dual classification should be called and possible ramification is now discussed. There are a number of issues associated with the use of the word subjective that need to be addressed. As Gillies (2000) points out: The difficulty with this terminology is that the subjective interpretations of probability include both the subjective theory of probability, which identifies probability with degree of belief, and the logical theory, which identifies probability with degree of rational belief. Thus, subjective is used both as a general classifier and for a specific theory. This is surely unsatisfactory (p. 19). This notion is not unique to subjective probability. In fact, the same issue exists for frequency interpretations. For example, frequency-type probabilities, the general classifier, have frequency probabilities, the specific theory. However, the terminology adopted earlier of artefactual and formal objective probability for the frequentist general classifier may help with the confusion. The case of subjective probability in mathematics education is slightly different. The use of the word subjective is mathematics education has a concurrent definition. Subjective probability is used as a general classifier in the sense that it refers to belief-type probabilities, but at the same time, and once further examined, subjective probability refers to the personal belief-type probability theory. However, adoption of the dual classification into personal and interpersonal probability: (1) is nothing more than another dual classification, where the rigidity issues of the framework still persist, (2) does not address the specific attention to terminology, which must also be taken into consideration (i.e., subjective probability already permeates the mathematics education literature), and (3) does not accurately reflect the debate over classical probability In order to address the issue presented, two options are taken into consideration. First, subjective probability can maintain its status as a general classifier and the theory element to subjective probability can be further refined. Second, subjective probability can maintain its status as a specific theory and the general classifier can be changed. This author proposes the former point be adopted, as it is easier to further refine definitions underneath a classifier rather than to keep a theory and rename the general classifier. In other words, the author proposes subjective probability, from this point on, take the status of a general classifier in accord with belief-type probabilities; and, when subjective probability theory is under discussion a further distinction must be made. The decision to adopt subjective probability as a general classifier is nothing more than the lesser of two evils. Unfortunately, a change such as this is not backwards compatible in the literature. Individuals reading prior mathematics education research concerning subjective probability will still have to be cognizant that subjective probability was used as both a general classifier, and a specific theory. Moreover, the reader will have to determine which sense of the word was being employed, and if the use of the word is evoking the specific theory, and not the general classifier; it is also important for the reader to determine whether the personal or interpersonal use of the theory is being discussed. In order to aid in distinguishing, between (1) classifier and theory, and (2) the notion of objectivity inherent to subjective probability, adoption of two new terms under the general classifier of subjective probability will be presented. The author proposes that in order to better incorporate the inherent debate over subjective probability, the distinction be made in mathematics education between intrasubjective probability and intersubjective probability. While a dual classification has occurred within subjective probabilityinto intrasubjective and intersubjectivethe traditional extremes associated with dual classifications are relaxed in the definitions chosen in order to overcome the nomenclatural issues inherent to further dual classifications. Intrasubjective probability is aligned with the philosophical notion of personal belief-type probability, which can be seen as the current implicit definition of subjective probability that exists in mathematics education. However, intrasubjective is seen more as an extreme, and thus more of a point of philosophical reference, rather than a continuum; and intersubjective probability, on the other hand, is seen more as a continuum. Use of intersubjective can be considered as somewhat aligned with the interpersonal belief-type probability seen in probability theory, and in the classical theory debate. However, intersubjective is used more in a literal sense in terms of states of overlapping subjectivity. This notion of intersubjective falls in line with Gillies (2000) definition where probabilities represent the degree of belief of a social group which has reached a consensus (p. 179). Thus the rigidity of interpersonal belief-type probabilitywhere all humans given the same degree of evidence would arrive at the same degree of beliefis not adopted, but rather used as one end of the continuum of interpersonal subjective probability (more of a literal sense of Gillies definition allows for a range of objectivity within the subjective notion of probability). Moreover, objectivity increases as one moves from intrasubjective to intersubjective, and within intersubjective. With the adoption of intrasubjective and intersubjective probability within the general classifier of subjective probability, specifics associated with subjective probability once unavailable due to mathematics education terminology can now be examined. Adoption of this new terminology is integrated into figure 9.  figure 9. proposed mathematics education nomenclature refinements As shown, the nature of dual classification in probability is a feature that runs deep. However, further dual classifications do not necessarily address inherent issues. For example, the dual classification of frequency-type probability into frequency and propensity possesses nomenclatural issues, because the term frequency has two meanings (similarly for subjective). Moreover, further dual classifications do not take theoretical debates and relative positioning based on order into account. In order to address these points, the notions of intrasubjective, intersubjective, artefactual, and formal objective have been proposed. The author contends that the adoption of the terms intersubjective and artefactual probability more accurately represent the ongoing debate of over the relative position of classical probability. Also, adoption of the terms intrasubjective and formal objective, while halves of dual classifications, represent philosophical bookends to the classical probability debate. Discussion and Conclusion Probability education literature is littered with calls put forth for probability measurement unification. Unfortunately, as the years pass on, the call put forth remains the same. For example: the three approaches need to be blended together (Hawkins, & Kapadia, 1984, p. 372); I would advocate a pragmatic approach which involves modeling several conceptions of probability (Shaughnessy, 1992, p. 469); teaching cannot be limited to one of these different perspectives (Batanero, Henry, & Parzysz, 2005, p. 31); this research advocates a richer understanding ofa more unified development of the classical, frequentist, and subjective approaches to probability (Jones, Langrall, & Mooney, 2007, p. 949). Given the number of dual classifications presented in this paper, Hackings (1975) argument that the slow emergence of probability being based on its Janus-faced nature seems to fittingly apply to this slow emergence of probability measurement unification in mathematics education. However, and as presented, issues inherent to probability measurement nomenclature are also playing a role in this slow emergence. The following statement is exemplary of the issues surrounding probability measurementand more specifically subjective probabilitynomenclature: We think it is timely for researchers in mathematics education to examine subjective probability and the way that students conceptualize it (Jones, Langrall, & Mooney, p. 947, this authors italics). While the author does not contend with the point presented he wishes to draw attention to the two uses of the word subjective probability made in the same sentence. More specifically, stating that it is timely for researcher in mathematics education to examine subjective probability, implies subjective probability is being used in the sense of a general classifier; and when stating the way that students conceptualize it, implies it, or subjective probability, is being used in the sense of a specific theory. Given the current state of probability measurement terminology discerning which meaning of subjective probability is being employed is left to the reader. Shaughnessy (1992) notes that if as we encounter new stochastic challengesour current set of stochastic models proves inadequate, a new paradigm for thinking about probability will have to evolve (p. 469). In line with this point of view, the author has proposed an evolution of the frequentist and subjective notions of probability measurement for mathematics education. For example, subjective probability has been suggested as a general classifier, and the specific theory of subjective probability is refined to intrasubjective and intersubjective. As a result Jones, Langrall, & Mooneys (2007) statement becomes: We think it is timely for researchers in mathematics education to examine subjective probability and the way that students conceptualize [intrasubjective and intersubjective probability] (p. 947). Further, based on the current state of probability education research, the impending attempt to unify the classical and frequentist probability perspectives also implies that it is just as timely for researchers in mathematics education to examine artefactual probability. Recognition of both the former and the latter points will be an attempt to truly unify probability measurement in mathematics education. References Batanero, C., Henry, M., & Parzysz, B. (2005). The nature of chance and probability. In G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for Teaching and Learning, (pp. 15-38). New York: Springer. Borovcnik, M., Bentz, H. J., & Kapaida, R. (1991). A probabilistic perspective. In R. Kapadia & M. Borovcnik (Eds.), Chance Encounters: Probability in Education (pp. 27-73). Dordecht: Kluwer. Brousseau, G., Brousseau, N., & Warfield, V. (2002). An experiment on the teaching of statistics and probability. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 20, 363-411. Chernoff, E. (2007). The Monistic Probabilistic Perspective. In Woo, J. H., Lew, H. C., Park, K. S. & Seo, D. Y. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1, p. 308. Seoul: PME. Cornford, F. M. (1966). The Republic of Plato. New York: Oxford University Press. Coshmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1996). Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty. Cognition, 58, 1-73. Davis, P. J., & Hersh, R. (1986). Descartes dream: The world according to mathematics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Garfield, J., & Ahlgren, A. (1988). Difficulties in learning basic concepts in probability and statistics: Implications for research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19(1), 44-63. Gigerenzer, G. (1994). Why the distinction between single event probabilities and frequencies is important for psychology (and vice versa). In G. Wright & P. Ayton (Eds.), Subjective probability. (pp. 129-161). Chichester, England: Wiley. Gigerenzer, G. (1996). On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A rebuttal to Kahneman and Tversky. Psychological Review, 103, 592-596. Gillies, D. (2000). Philosophical theories of probability. New York: Routledge. Hacking, I. (1975). The emergence of probability: A philosophical study of early ideas about probability induction and statistical inference. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Hacking, I. (2001). An introduction to probability and inductive logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Hawkins, A. S., & Kapadia, R. (1984). Childrens conceptions of probability A psychological and pedagogical review. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 349-377. Jeffrey, R. (2004). Subjective probability: The real thing. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Jones, G. A., Langrall, C. W., & Mooney, E. S. (2007). Research in probability: Responding to classroom realties. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, (pp. 909-955). New York: Macmillan. Jones, G. A., & Thornton, C. A. (2005). An overview of research into the teaching and learning of probability. In G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring Probability in School: Challenges for Teaching and Learning, (pp. 66-92). New York: Springer. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). Subjective Probability: A judgment of representativeness. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Konold, C. (1989). Informal conceptions of probability. Cognition and Instruction, 6(1), 59-98. Konold, C. (1991). Understanding students beliefs about probability. In E. von Glassersfeld (Ed.), Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education, (pp. 139-156). Holland: Kluwer. Konold, C., Pollatsek, A., Well, A., Lohmeier, J., & Lipson, A. (1993). Inconsistencies in students reasoning about probability. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24(5), 392-414. Shaughnessy, J. M. (1992). Research in probability and statistics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, (pp. 465-494). New York: Macmillan. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982a). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982b). Belief in the law of small numbers. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. PAGE  PAGE 3 UVfgh qʟ퉁ui`iUIUIUIUihhhg6OJQJhhhgOJQJhg6OJQJh+hg6OJQJh*(vh*(v5OJQJh*(vOJQJhgOJQJhgCJ OJQJ^JaJ hghgCJ OJQJ^JaJ 2jhghg5CJ OJQJU^JaJ ,jhghg5CJ OJQJU^JaJ h+hg5OJQJ#hghg5CJ OJQJ^JaJ UVf J Ro q s Z"!!!!!!!!!!!! $`a$gdg $^a$gdg $`a$gdg$a$gdg$a$gdg3LIJ#=TnGRU+F|=sq r s ޴ȝȎȀthK]hg5OJQJhK]hg56OJQJjhK]hgOJQJUhZ;hg5OJQJhNhgOJQJhK]hg6OJQJhgOJQJhK]hgOJQJhGihgOJQJhhhgOJQJhoEhg6OJQJh+hgOJQJ+ !!""R#Z#g#s###$$K%%%4(<(D(P( )))%)4)C)**********++*+++p+,*,8,޾ް|hK]hg56OJQJheuehgOJQJ_Hheuehg6OJQJ_HheuehgOJQJheuehg5OJQJ_Hh[}hg6OJQJhK]hg6OJQJhgOJQJhK]hgOJQJh|-hg6OJQJh|-hgOJQJ-Z"L%4)********\kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la $$Ifa$gdg $`a$gdg ******hkdW$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la $$Ifa$gdg*** ++thhh $$Ifa$gdgkd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la++++*+thhh $$Ifa$gdgkde$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la*+++p+q+9,:,u,.>/th\\\TTH $@`@a$gdg$a$gdg $`a$gdg $`a$gdgkd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 la8,:,v,D-E---=.t... //=/>/ 122222!3)3E3K33344444L4Y4c455$717H77ɽܱܥܖ܈}rfrrh8hg6OJQJh8hgOJQJhg56OJQJhK]hg56OJQJjshK]hgOJQJUh[}hg6OJQJhK]hg6OJQJh+hg6OJQJhK]hgOJQJhgOJQJh+hgOJQJh+hg5OJQJ *h+hgOJQJ(>/?/ 1 1444b4c4I748586878R9S9)<*<,<x< $@`@a$gdg $`a$gdg$a$gdg$a$gdg$@@]@^@a$gdg$]^a$gdg777778R9T9c9g99::<'<*<+<,<x<<==>>>>>>>>>>???????????#$ҳ{{{{ܱϴܱϴܱ5Oϴ56Oϴ6ϴ[6Oϴi6Oϴiϴ+6Oϴ+ϴϴ+<y<???????c|kdm$$IfTl0,"LL t0644 laT $$Ifa$gdg$a$gdg $@`@a$gdg????ww $$Ifa$gdg|kd n$$IfTl0,"LL t0644 laT????ww $$Ifa$gdg|kdn$$IfTl0,"LL t0644 laT??@#@ww $$Ifa$gdg|kd&o$$IfTl0,"LL t0644 laT#@$@f@g@AFHaL{OATkXlX{ssssgggss $`a$gdg$a$gdg$a$gdg|kdo$$IfTl0,"LL t0644 laT $@f@BB4GVGHaLOOlXmXnXX!YBYYYZZZZ-\W\q\\\]]]]bbeeeeee;fHfh章ߠԅwlh4"hgOJQJhZ;hg56OJQJjhZ;hgOJQJUhK]hg6OJQJh" hgOJQJh+hg5OJQJhK]hg56OJQJj,phK]hgOJQJUhK]hgOJQJhgOJQJh+hgOJQJh+hg56OJQJ)lXnXXXZs\_Ebdeeeeeghjj0k~mnnnn $$Ifa$gdg $`a$gdg $`a$gdg$a$gdg$a$gdghikii{jjj/k1k%l9lllnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnno oo;oIoKoWozo{ooooooʿ⿳ssssheuehg6OJQJ_Hheuehg5OJQJheuehgOJQJ_Hheuehg5OJQJ_Hh+hgOJQJhOhg6OJQJhLhgOJQJhLhg5OJQJh+hg5OJQJhgOJQJhK]hgOJQJhrhgOJQJ+nnnnnnn\kdJ.$$IflF ,""h t06    44 la $$Ifa$gdg $$Ifa$gdgnn:o;ozoth\h $$Ifa$gdg $$Ifa$gdgkd.$$IflF ,""h t06    44 lazo{ooooth\h $$Ifa$gdg $$Ifa$gdgkd/$$IflF ,""h t06    44 laoo$p%pqtvwwtlddXXdd $`a$gdg$a$gdg$a$gdgkd30$$IflF ,""h t06    44 lao%pmptprrttuvvvwwwwy/z@z?|ڀ=\"&12'()lmɽɽɽɲߧߧߧߧߧsg *hrhgOJQJh[hg56OJQJj0h[hgOJQJUh[hg6OJQJhvhgOJQJh[hgOJQJhrhgOJQJhLhg6OJQJhLhgOJQJhZ;hgOJQJhgOJQJh+hgOJQJh+hg56OJQJ(w#xxFyy?z@z?|~&')lmݓ•$a$gdg $`a$gdg $`a$gdg$a$gdg $ & Fa$gdgmz;|0PRU:\hϩȹȫȠȔȌȠȌȌȌȌrȫfhZ;hg5OJQJj)hZ;hgOJQJUh+hgOJQJhgOJQJhLhg6OJQJhZ;hgOJQJhZ;hg56OJQJj̙hrhgOJQJUhLhgOJQJhrhgOJQJh@hgOJQJhOhg6OJQJh[hgOJQJ(V;!TȢЩѩABҬO $ & Fa$gdg $ a$gdg $`a$gdg $ & Fa$gdg$a$gdg$ideUV`le:Ae^5r=>34ֽⲦ}qhZ;hg5OJQJjUmhOhgOJQJUhOhg6OJQJhi>hg56OJQJhi>hg6OJQJhi>hgOJQJh'6lhgOJQJhOhg56OJQJhOhg6OJQJhOhgOJQJhgOJQJhLhgOJQJ,hiTUx{Mef] $ & Fa$gdg$@@]@^@a$gdg$a$gdg $ & Fa$gdg]y636#$>vwU dgdg $`a$gdg $ Ba$gdg $ Ba$gdg$a$gdg467"#=,09%\rOg #%)0w30EHʿʿʿ髡{mh0phg6OJQJaJh0phg6OJQJaJh0phgOJQJaJh0phgOJQJh0phg6CJh0phgCJh|-hgOJQJh~hgOJQJh~hg6OJQJhgOJQJhOhgOJQJhOhg5OJQJhLhgOJQJ*HWpXk}s+nA!RS01234:;<>миh*(v h*(v0Jjh*(v0JUhLhg56OJQJhLhgOJQJhgh0phg5CJh0phg6CJh0phgCJh0phgOJQJh0phgOJQJaJh0phg6OJQJaJ6 D{ 7fS01 dgdg' & 0` P@ 1$7$8$H$^ `gdg123<=>IJKLMh]hgdg &`#$gdg $xa$gdg >?EFGHILMhLhg56OJQJh*(vh*(v0JmHnHu h*(v0Jjh*(v0JU% 0:pg/ =!"#$%DyK egan_chernoff@sfu.cayK 8mailto:egan_chernoff@sfu.caDdd/=^f  c BFAclass and freqb?6*r_EGyw n6*r_EGywPNG  IHDRdlgAMABO pHYs  "tEXtSoftwareQuickTime 7.3 (Mac OS X)#mtIME  ncIDATx}/zm ՖI;.6b.[lK!mGF²д=ubt Z` P;AsGl5#wr_}w@*p|p|;|sRN, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, 2<<\}F /?o~s7Κ5ֻ'Ud{G?Mrsܒ%K$X¹;ɡK/t…G}GKɄF"p.N/}+(n/YܴfɄ!pvΐɱ$X›&39dBcK!cI&;39L%P^8fr,Ʉz$p ɱ$X«ɱ$XBE39d'Lv5X X2yML%01%X X2LL_C2a"K&:X X4cI&ԖX cI&ԊXҘ,cI&TXh8cI&TX8&I&ǒLLL%p%mgr,Ʉ G,W2$.d$0Ēz"gE2a%A&ϙdK&: C,drI&d" J2l%LVd›'L2Y oXR{2Ys g&ԒLN( oD, $^K,6 c%#uG2aXR 2Y$Ē K&d2%L6$drKƟL6O~eqx+gCwaoêeK~Vn> ngg4_z_l[Gz[1<[׬JϿ.GwV..~ Uf.*~+Vl-8֜V\1?* mzb#g Z>wٷ~Ƨ>淡ٿɲx쥓id)-~]t˕;^9q^GO4͚ʑZ?xˆw+wۻsݚ]ԿnzW/x啃=ouQO/l\y+]RY⦩m'}[o}*yPC+ƚOwυ]v{;4ػi=^~}l3;K?>~r@m}vKJb=طk g#+S*v:P8J倳|`:~H]_|y<}ɢZ9]6;۾jǁգ:ŕy,c+VN=謜lkoo-.3o|PmڃnphiTj]x䠴hO>ľ 9Wt{xb{6ު΃[G絴h;yl]}xxg$wlǓprYVS4uӏk`T* Z5Cľ--=Dqxϩ9wր')=1iZ*O-otO i\=V,pxJӚZZN|u:7qa_ڵ{!P}b TUx[Ύ@, K@, WGȑ#]]]ދ:رZE3NN*O^cro={vwg''9K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, KcAMQ,IENDB`$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V l t065 $$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V l t065 $$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V l t065 $$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V l t065 $$If!vh5 5 5 #v :V l t065 NDdd/=cd  c @&Amath v theoryb$d=U5_C6r nj$d=U5_C6PNG  IHDRdlgAMABO pHYs  "tEXtSoftwareQuickTime 7.3 (Mac OS X)#mtIME B`IDATxA8p+ltksq+у&Nv2\uu\IHHV7{+5 "% !Bƛd3# /aziǷMN/[@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K {{y{{g{w$pL~K_zMjcܹs%X±;Jrꩧ^s5{7Y>Lh&b L~>7Ҥc66m?b,SI:eꔥO+nz\>\xڣ(KO?-}zw~*/`ԩS\y 뾕 R)S,:q eyjV<6s*튿4x .ܶ|iW([ pO?rovsrYkP%/Ɠ7ć4O,|ɍ죟\|?|]߷;o/Ow:_}[}h+θm_>Щ.ڱ˼}w.=﹵/謳}3:Z?2qķ˷ѿڸӤ;ܰM,]խ'}ښ>={Ͻ=7:?7ڲȣҷ=ڰ}_ڹ6sӳş~򓳧_ʻkԹ;o['̗ڽ묷ɰ>=3[t/(ɗݱ1<3U_;n妯O o}כwvG,*_;_/Tk?5w?|W'(}rs8wxk[˄'x쇿?Ь& ѻjsT9~WN:kOuUTEeOm:xUK/\:8h?cw}oM3e쩽* c~\k˸SjNni{یtk'=Xɬ {ˇgց3vڄ O|q?з{(^޲aS[KYvguyb .]o?wʮڃxl*Ӳ{dL,gw wJ~0cP;m.rȼ g)žk)ƝR^ó/28rm(vŜn;KW>uW>Z=_lܻTw{Dѵ"d1}g[| 6W*]1Z*ګjgb}%w~R`?]o :]6pbA͝mݝ 4{֦}|Ղ^]kE8nmK |g[<8cs,|mq{y2kt9hms-r; /0s^lwb cβm#}g9B}}EkU{voo?w&[ 쬌rzrk۹vjӂ98ArBoÎACmX_۹w\{{ 8pldZ_sDk#^C:$]럙1cFyf< %b X@ %oXSyd3sHKޠꦛ_?tS_搑M퐅ZSvZlxƢqm}ˢw5YimUR Yc?օ޼}~+ΩwH#04z*XQO8tJf޶|U;>d(欨Vkɪ;7*.}KN -f>~mmZ%]rք6SW{Ղ#x_U߼cEq%Sh>!ٙ7U*|Q綻j .TboLjA8p];>>1ӮrW*yk7{yu+:TaibZap Ty[wQ{D_˴3a*95!N,Ǵw~T{SE(P?de-m34owޭ[ؕ7`t7sx$#xǽUi`{?]hlñ$ȼf X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ %}rs0IENDB`6Ddd/=X  c 4eAbt v ftb06luɟvt˻9 67 n6luɟvt˻9PNG  IHDRdlgAMABO pHYs  "tEXtSoftwareQuickTime 7.3 (Mac OS X)#mtIME /z6 IDATx xQ6PQE7TģV%X--Z#QV-^(V(xОbH7hJB *VAbL$kyg!yL_f~33]6nT;ڱvڅ _dI21bĈK.M6C LhLjO>y?OcƌLhL^{_~[^^SO=p+R21-'1@V\\ܡCmv뭷>_~СC[n¡;L,aǕwuwL 8%츟&M׿Yf[L2KA~[p@pzɄK,aGo޽sϗ_~CGɄH,k3gN.]>'x?A2aKz>xS?/yYI&4b _CEEEVV֬Y~?S$?O>&8昳̘ǰ,P%8ڷܰcǎEEE7|wYǏ.P%lKnݺ+={X+ɄKؖ}uQ߾ov0 "Uw}7޸~͞=JpjH&=-{g{٤I/'xb)Ʉ$q y䑾}z8[%P76lٲ;/T'L2agKȚ5k~͘1~w}Th{I&;--<餓R=Z P[xO<$N%\&ɄoN,!Z|yǎ-Ztus=N!M%ݻKgqƳ>ۀv ;F, 0`ܸqGy+ҢET.H&|]b.m^{>SPPЦMTNI&l?dϟuYiӺvᤆdKvQ ,ԩg}C 0 I1ɄmKvE+V8}=:é/$F,$=zvi={/ Kv9W\qŃ>خ]W_};NSOI&lH,ٵ;k{g͚uaz8dB5d2mڴO?}v{N9TLKv??UV=LpdW&V\٩SW_}ߟ4`ɮI,i駟/zR=O2Ո%_5֬Y{WxH&{ʸq)^z8d+K/vZ|aʔ)ݻwOp3ɤqKw}_bWz8ɤK>SN ,8p{zoڎbOVon=:\>39ƿU%={'Ϸk׮ir-Ϳl{qSUޮm۶ w^iĒI,%WqZ(_ѢY};^T"=I#EP;;zzQBv'm^x3ڟ?nqNMߩeScZTX9;>۷֫7/̛Qܳܳ˨hFUٟ_!7(#ڷM#19+&=G߿|ل屹.ެH.H[-Wɱǰ=ɳ;ݰ´ڥ5%)Oɓ$:нfiN\Űs6ےѭm:lJK?癒ѿw2xu;}ѭ*HaZ !fͺ[ku3Ffſ~#WVV&,N*<<`m5 ׮_3nAAIT1<3|mQU™M%s3txC+G%!+qڵ+Fw J+&vi霪/I^q佲 idǗFͩ՟wg,3ό;v[Ψ^fNN.Q+ݺᒬ\:#$G(jrk.?g'=3^Z\)Qv9ɕ6pm{'Ek7'3po-(| K "^Åɱ! -KR";-wZZ/ad||lyyقowFW];{ѧ?ӝsXZ~4i|{ƣω$gOXѼykx¨IrٸU1#қ55tGw񽲽2-U G˲/ŗ4U:)l]o0Oܾɂxuߑq+%Vʟuxf_ =dpbxϒz" dïvʵko;[+ +tk\JXxO8'70Q(zfDtxHkޢ)/||@Kr6-٧$**2}KrM=_xȈx+"!*Qe7Dt?._*Zejܷ[bf'FbMՓ~{IUMӚ왼4-Yqn{x֒e3G/!Q|x!-ӫ&k{C⯿{e+q/owؙ+W vjSf\WFʒlnz/rgsDy0f>7뫰عZ֚Ꟑհ@ϱʖ9ӈ(:Ѐ+&Ē=`'A+7;&<ugUʆg|vM,6?DG.O7ܖт3^v1o0ҍ1hy*+;aUov*YROm~44+xώyɒHlt UtsO@ F@,6?{hyݴCr/+)buyZf*#e"GUYYk`gK}Z=#8;樱7&<eOcOdbCz{d#޽##ݲ7u;yU+Օ*;8+M zu֍W#u}ɳE$*N:*]Yh(VM[CDzcd^C:WAY֖#Cyv6sVe|gLyʠ,էYwgKi[o{sl|({;iUBAC\~crΪI᷷q*icTVV.YROя/uQ͛7Opl͚58S=x$vU6\kߢ]Xֶmwy[nI@>饗/4֬׮_)?Տ":سT/Տ?hƏ?ի·o1ÇߴՏ?cږ4xp@a˒d͚57pC=R?7ކeffΞ=*))٧OBF 4,i0z뭸s5jԥ^Lr/]C0a‰'Xg[4 <ø;v3gζK;3O??o/n 4>lٲ>+/Ժ香3asѣ42ĈN:٣%/R?䓃:3?ʽװS7ږԳ>3RƩ7ގ2־ٳg尨%%%ɴ@f˒hO?jS9䐳;sε2ڠѳe6̘:ĥ<Ν[[~jwuĈ-Kꑏ?_~/{1lذ_;uwСC+**N8 &z;QFC,/ymڴ֩SpkNNNaaag>Рϯ⊲9'.E4ܝ]h?\ѳ۳۳8-X=O>K.<eI׿>Rvu޼y)9}g.^8++kDg,I?o߾_s7{t_TTTti„ mڴIxC,I?_~+Y:R=oFNNNټy܋.(#/R߻w︔ .ٲ. }}իWGU/B~>orLZѰeI]׿uwv9.婧:޼\i***ۭ֭jؕٲd[xE]׿iӦq2v-Ճ^7pCyy?a„mۦzD@ %;O:#|Ӟ4|رxZ2,;KII#Ľ|b)cq RVVַoߟVJ:e˒b̙}yowgyfGT 6;S="ز%Çw5.e)G)u{}{򗿴"lYR-Ztw}AR=7__^^ޱclj'=<\sMiiQG'?AG999?222Ǝ۷oT؉ K-Xj߯_4RFU{̚5k]zu?~e7K/]tE|A֭y=zzDujԩq,,Yr>ɖ%;򦛲:唳Rڲϛ7ǰ+,<Э[aÆ[999{wQ=]w]^?&L8R="ֈ%;~c8q oVܹs322~zD@2,_{ueśP7pëqfqwy+WLZ`˒_۷oqqۿu-#M/~{챮]zD7b˒f͚뮻Gq)̛7O){":s>SN9oLg˒ ??f̘K.$#j0|?C&LT, =RvqΜ9J 8_?cfϞ}wK!lҥK:묫z͚5r̙3}bkW_/W^ݿ޽{/òeSL7"?䓃>ҥKG೾{c=˖%k≮oU*e8S͛׳g?G?M7dh(lY<oѢE>}zDo۟q7qD{@g˒MFرc\Ν;J\~{kǧzD@-˺G>s 6l=_H 33sV?|Nf"h֬Y-;1O/⫮*i}٢{/K۱%, @, @, @, @, @,D٢^hʊ4˒T~K2ubiO?=mfQYbI͝O]@X6Xik۶o n+?ر>Z&nl_nգE=9^;L\bc{P6'9lZv9%!-yiқD7tиao>U)Q3xs.9b[f׋jw_żG'] FEN,%WqZ>4/_}S{Q湣Ǝ8eTQ4}M*.9ϯFP=MlGIoyFg [-}+1mDFY\ۤ/_GTuۈ쿎U{V5?_e=;K6o}}ۨ&#囩>_Ȱǯ6;51ꮲڱ6ٟ٦;/֤ٴռVeџu56/^hz&3=¼³?ϱ՗99;·ɰso=ᆹeɴ8±ϒ6^Q>E;Ա&R'y晱c< s[&-(]<93W^p@pWO3jΊœ Yl3F&o9rW.]u}ieeq_qGfSZZ0k׍*_[>*%~Zck߫xTVrI'Ginvտ̜xQ/,ߜYPvE> +.2QIs&'/+&3p5(U~=hFrFխ#WVVn>eG,]\Ѡɕa'.ChtlY6xypq K?]|]u툒CEnYEeM;- -ҿVh1GbAӷHK?\ΥNꙷnΈߚ='mZ6ݺ?kլˆ-Ӛ7GI_Ȝ„'DѲݢ ~䙸tMm04JTb|xyG7Ir4QQZrK$ѪUl;nr6KN&h-iii.xʴh~N;V7y/(p |Zn,5_큲[k8&s &Lm?[ϊAƏqxk*:]jҾw`V?X<~CFdzSWrhӓnrĚ%d 2H{2y9р՗K s瑙L蠼Skf_ܾ:yϲp̪kԅg0 M~Ik~rmq~Vɬr~͛4G.\˪䛦YK7hՏ;gSVWCܧ..wc'.ChIJ쌧'KWnt}+ol4% fXmtͱϤ"oJ{F__3Z:h,y,Hm|RmEϊ/$?X>3dFSH~nM\[:jIWT;_\:'yຼ| Jg@^8Ue/,_ձkf=tQ0[?J{ɏg/1hox}Ғ9Kvu^m@Jk-vw|酙vg*}yktL8uZɗ/ٽ$fj>әìӯvo{e%[ u Kvub$OfMkn>*wꉪKŌ/TVM|mtŔ>>%UϴJeOo}HV~X$+KZXˆ'~]ּ(yםboEUϼ|&9u;~G%}کݵW=\صS7 ӼW;Kӣh쟾ԓflkGi1 W:.NCᢒ˦%Tw}j98vN!GV]5 &Ɋ'bTV= yk5`h(sԵQfVVրɳ&;cݱo#YUF#/0/m(Ue#-H2S1-oKv{go049+=,hEV\V5_wҊDzzZ|]yH$ҪVOlu_YY1Hɍo~H[|<4&^m8+>/6۷;;::*4%㩰ժ#󤦦Nd.)!Y4Mf+WڵkJJJݛcH A:4a„6m$$$ ㏍vLSd P<==7InmLn!Ygƌ 8}tv )+H~˗;88уp2nG񱲲矇 u8!e%@R)MJ믿1c<R&q YVTTq\cR&@sCW^ILL7nܡCx #j(Ld Pٳ+WWӧOp#ChH}g}JJJ^2%ѣGǍN<9|piHM_ 2ٳgsNSBx|H͛˖-۰a4 Lǁd -F:uԘ1c9bF6R&@ YBKٿ~֖p)Q!YBqƥKv)%%ɉp ),:vرcx'N1p HBeee <֭[;w:!eZA]xqɒ%7n:S 0HhZoooDꫯ㏭[:"ӂ $Khq,Xc}\c2Ce֭/رcrr3:L% 'N=ztV?>rH1HHR߃ *--ݾ} eBKd -\.ښxg;tu8)Z$Kp۷o9fJ/!eBKd ~W鋣Gzyyq%Cˆd ŋ *))ٲeˢEE@Kd ֭[ʚ?۹eA˃d y׏?_9 ,В%K6윜ܱcGiѐ22 Yٵk׼yڷop02!YE9uꔗ׽{~G>X0H`,rzxxܼysƍK,:R&#$Keee/ҹswu8`R&$K7nѣGGq +++#Asd R\\h⡾+VуKsΦoܸA[pE 2l˖-+//o۶?ؿO׮][ju`TH`Xnnĉܸ?55o߾&O:C nHOO>};a}6NFr*u2~x`mV5kpKII & W\?… Č9r$??(؞:Sd `%H Yd Sggf)ͷ̄ YAA.M~iLfțm CS Ԇ j-j@Y*He\:hUFmdZDEjPO5Rx._#b7wKdC2w 3 Q_ D%2aɒ>W|T8fu]~ |UHVI۠iα]Qv[yA&q@{]nS!ɫWnEjD&h4 )ӲǦ /*49tJDNEA:%2KIT$iB iS/ YHlaEN]rL# g )**JLDH*tOa-d1sRhYU Okm:l[6n^}FKٚLƋ:/|zMj  KTh4VEpU)Hav KҘLK KX5'G!-Ld:Eɬ?G+A4%p'!ӃdRԺ1 tU m!t +"OOGc{eƒnK:g꣫\]0ԕ0'mz?%Ub񰾮9jEw(#D9cQPrPWz?:W ҭKk`24jmdoTT\J'0GZCEyS9{3U'!*'%}zll۔=~j).cvꖩdқYAﱲUhDsWٰkr;RBE>"G>ls~jwl4xH mvZvv~gՖyц'.oͮeQƐH ǯwiAӎ+ܡ ;wν/+RMUj2yt Ww{9nhk\;*!˥ wIG v?Gqeh5eL i6 oO[P'V זVVf5ɼW.N/'6t,6ilw,[H]_ɞcm'txĪ-]åR+o{M<&ECQ #<SP5 e`> f9rt0]AHQȒ ,9UQQ[-Q#sh:'{40I*O_0ZZ"[08>1m'4MͲ02PWE~!nFFykBYQ$7>DW~,":*/'4%XIn0$]'DH_j{-Kw[FHJu0PwZ? ;ʖFaFZ.WU-WղMj-M:^誳& *ru}1ת rF҄{YL5 jL8 k,_gy~L0jLBYjWk5y50LJk Yd `%HTSj#@j 0oG0I Q&xE6#.t,Ɏ^'+R~UX%#d߸`rj}|WpCT5jr\o!\fge"F/QVXR!`:bf1#N*5Hq0{ifؕUț|Z&,D=8ʄM7Bbu N`Gt#^:;}#Cv=KVscl.q*XaWZP{fk`e"rndb03VM1F] LԃLnXkL%wQ-d۶ccDY} M9veك4'$K0QD҉;X3{5vŰ8~Tm 3VḬn6ݶƌ1tXǎȠ.bsR{3ؕϋgY:*ܦƀ(Gr]hZp"cPE|;l4*![ZmstxPJ FL#!LWQ&!D**5ձ縎JjLi|ʹ+G 0W/j9sGc3] L0S<^ˀ] f7/t Dѧ/|>666\Sr'Q0h$&+ [ Ya}pʕ+n:u͛7[nmmm=b͔SL: o߾]*r{e˸"Zd۷]]];t萘HSfHH|@_pX\D&L;w;w?_~ xW~/_u`9вs3fdz*::zȑUoIR??L[[;v[ -K0'7͔'NȨ))Pp²25MF_p-X ,l?t@>wz =zt֬Yzڻw!C'X,$4,R3gΤIh/OɔԳ>H|z--K0&NzN:ڵח3gμ~I -K0{}CrԨQ)W_}9v|OOիW -KhvyyyӧO_۴iCSeZjuP {TAݻO>\G@o߾ ܺu4 8ٹsaOlllnڄ}iXh.eeeU=|ys̔M)))AAAJrƌofii)AQe "))iڴi/_vpp/_u#jٽ{/uD`$hYBj!!!#F22%gܸq]?~!h!в;u_>00눚Ŷm}]J~,%4of b4<\GԌΝ;wY@u3fp4#&PZZ:eʔ3g*%KXv$~.]zmtqCשSO~GGǯۛ눌*>>&˂ݻٳ$,4͊+3X,h7n>ݫV˃%4<䓟}󹎈c۷o_l{޽{ %4Ʈ]u?|LLL߾}$?~HOO[l9s&@iXx477omB{;2e~%''_#f͚5yd\uPвGp3fd_ў\GdN8A+g#F:"x,hYB/[ۛf7x###^^^Əʕ#G~вê?iӦٳgsرcqww{>\G%/LᑖLHϟ>_~%@c YC;vѢE+WLJJ۷̙3i$`vpvQڈqFϞ=3l0#2{oڽ{H$:"h(,6Zx_fJR%2e5jTFFիW_y+Vs%@4A_ӦM:" _s΋/~LZG6{xxL9tPڠDl&{ϙ3gϨ(#в4Lۏ?jժ֭[ϛ7oΜ9A(6"0Ӭy֭[!CpQ}WHN>8((IʩTڴR7܇{Թ澱ְ<%1âyY.\u fȑ#:j5, Yd `%H Ydi\p":Ԃ8tDRR,њm~zs90,O#ȥO>_H~@,%+3wxNl_nlj{fSnRyt=gf yPfڟt` HnH!q[zgח[UR%oILaVJ~IZinӆmx;HRܕB_Ϥ{3&{$4w 'M9@.:?!tEyYYiqgPQ\kiO)!ҹ+g}GD)w'͂DE qRW~7/&+).dwG-ؽ*7HσTQ'l ޔ@_|/YdܺWl^&@[SIuӌNn:##c#?EpI{ /ukםQ[;v}Y1_N[OeeM[N#"O톕:LZC|gM0`qqq[nmeJ#Vc`l"Vir4" b˄hb QxZe Ø55)Ldp IDAT+4EV$qEzai EJ3ES¬?KS!a*T&ո:|4pSS2:bVuN L o ST%`XR<22?z۰iklw޲fjlMxVmO5jmrbfi)!"#Mdv> \;K|]B܇P/$KGZm2Av.-5 EIC岇6<]F[9mx+ 릌 iz_8[.N/;)ӭb1[Q!^}!969wޛNۼXZ|#^_m0*Tjϲ[d\ì**-j 90Q^&=2Bi|/ߚ%\iѳ9|z9c#hЀ&N3pL ' wn(O]g:=a@4S]iS*;׫fZ-'%<{HyKdiᴪ}fg.}\F>~|v!R%bn륽BX$K '1\<ͺ ih5d{Cu "0^SUݬK{K$fi6Rw/J Ksv <)j /'g.-,KsY`+8ٳ1e"B /ІGs/\ >׳c㗤e%7Xܰ6ٛ`ߎҞҷɳ^9˱Ձ;𜥑4%$ٶٳ0< 8>/:x&xPSԕ+M%2Eq]LA#JQTc]~!4Ee/i%ջYx/험EIwY%t8 kF왾ă\1:GNEኝ;3*[ -1Бɜ,^"~WDb7|#=ŧ/4͎i0=frQ3<ݬWd{ OX4 av1w{ef{5!Yf0=t6^յW*MսFW9ڶ)9zS3g뎴URSvCNeg[^!;ψ3c}QhjrP-ޢ8cm_^CD\R#ﵤ8Գo1}:9˥ wIG v?'%LΖ֞;@sU}Wԙ^uzi?oS E$M 23e5rq}h>k`α" .tSD)s)~~"Ct].""HttKL# EE"?3q6^gjݬzh/ ݵ91XI湪yKҊk|;rH~~… cʨ6sJq&jTˋĦRZ4]U'ZkiZ]o-QzvD\f 2-B{.IWyj4Ж\DI}kZa;[lUX\yeפfoݴ/0λQ-3E:,nCgfi DM5o6r.a @0aP^^~'|r:t0Q*O#fP(RRR4͈# F<#F"WZeccch ᅲdZ}7:wU0j,XЧOGGIIw}G]t8qiٸ$H-ٳgbq~~P(ԩSBB͗ס\~erСwIKKstt<|;ס@mfiwذa4So'O\dIYYرc7ut-_|M3wӧOO2`Ĉ::x=A3[~O0_ݻW5}ΝVV̠+//0–F/+[niӦoҡ/,ź{oMm۶~D"ر#-yMG۷oر f%{ɓܹcNHpСb/^tqqŜϟ?o[ ZݧOzj;55[nL&3f0H(##W^h+ /_\a;tpqD%$$t W)/|ڵ^x~ꩧD@4Ga?7nBh,ZvѢEU4"##+sm;wt'|om~HeÆ O;w믿>΢gy.n[g}d޽333gQ]v4hPAAASE di/z8GRzh_\.5j] meҶ/_Yi/1/ʕ+nnntݻwOKK{#A4oG1cƔ5b5M@@],۾}{S-ꫯڴiCko֬Ywm*J___v< Y*//M++]v5ߊKKKoE@P7֕͑#GoE{i۶-]ju Y7oD"zdieee9;;չ\pWg._<`ZK={h՝>}K.tu/ҍ7{udifΟ?+د_/g4={zzҕvQ"gf$))СC Ҽ{MgϞ5JZ,$Ksr㫯j䓢cOܹӘ6qIѷ~'E Çjl67ndc -?U<\nܷ h4rر`~'aѣGߺu`8T*}||9:m0_5̙3adiJJJF^/u8s999ѐu88p =zs#11aذaFn r Y짟~s}#F`;;uv>7xׯs}.]ruuK*rEA4]'N`q\S[yy9sخۣHvk>uT|Ʊlر쳞?X$K`f=Π`޽{V2^Xl{g}u8T L%M\cmM6MOkRn߾=qDv(p m}opP$K"˽1C'N:Jza^tpիWyu׿OiSNuܙ/syC4!.\۷/==YYY\h FOLL:&HC&qΣ߿? ܹs\`Ɛ,M?ܱcGz\9rdII 4ݻwgΜ_sNkmmM7TT\n=z4[[۟~pI/w1yb-?{Ͻ{BBBy֬Yu8EmiݺM,!YrȖ,YbaÇ QǏW(\ܹ3yd?mV߿pΝ;/d-? ɒKnz}ǎ:tٞ={M0`@^^yō7^z%]t9}44ș3gz) /@&4 . tvv68dɍN:cֈ#,~Z=}tm۶ݽ{7p'|F;iҤ;wpNs)--fO:dɁHܹs[գ?Zܻwpl~T:hݺ֭[ Y??:9x`v*JéAR[46>o>1۷]*.XhnHSVV믳O\cliiiݻwv+((4h199pɓvvvtGe$K#>wޙ\ÍԵkWSL,;;g@0p&~Wv`ÇqT*)3&L}6pW^UA[u8ɲ}Wfͺ{.1{I,Xf\`r,?{ﱷ|\cZ[97xØiiӦOٳh5 [liݺ5ŋkZ0!HEPbzqqq\c㏪^j5V'~3N|||hy{{r@l/_0`=3##pLL&sww7NrgϞѣ]s=g^=睝iE\xpLeKJJrppǚ!CЦ :Z^owS{ݼyӓVWǎ% pɲEGGmۖe~mZu8NseYyyyhYYYܹp8֊#XaE;ԩS+V,^W׹sgۼ-@@ӊ 0BCCv={6l0iҤ(˻v__Z"##njӬR^'܉'a]Q:ͽ.]>>>젾O>h^hS*۷g ?V={Buxvx̋)wT*Sq@ XLsHKII|ʕ+_pCjnGϯ-eQ^P:$K, @0ꡕZ%״EI'8Td)Iֱ[;2|Sp"[i̐:5Gk'(=WQɒk<{{eDGn;c.LQ+lRWf/Tb *EU%jH)e)75j[`{׭lǀd eA~~AA 7552 Ru .JOeVZynjRznn\Ο+1eWfzf~eBQ榧&yuwMHhTQځ~#,Oy+VZ .WZ鲙5 g?5x8' %㭬)pjIQsh* D v̗].!sD~bc.wR]l-]~rӞKw$zdYYAֽ'" H:Jbf_#T9 )QH#t/싐)9tkt5̮H?e”Gܺ:ճ]e] qxJaIAouhh~~Bw| awzbOk.M?r*J > %'vy)1:Ș=ْ+ $04=L߰Ύ7Ԃ鱛~=̓ʆgۥ",>ҵٴճ?!灲2**2.S7Ш4E]P*zђuL!?֠Rmʯ:(n/uչ隱ʢ!ryʫ%6OII4,L9U\4:X?/BwD+,S3W%aBD7P,Q"ce46L0,>! ilfv0,+W LiP h*t/uo7XX6har_Mb6s/75xD`gWm NxҒyog>\]Н*yD?l.:}7X :\Q9ih 9Yo/E\W,\MI S8QK<6':yyu;^^ !3TcZյ(l!TcC6 B|B5% ?L?[/u +\!Y>矕4٥EF\ݡտO@@S/5ye;%z/awѬ]ez?\I8cm6S&m[N}t $KMw1!ܪYiӡ7}oEԚW$?ZRJ:ٽUUӧrC2,%תERC=[Urki3~j Z1t]X9u.q6y.bO:t")o&-pe5 K7Gpcd?=o+?NZsO<*K8Y&s'cuk<޵=_~]۳[7׭:Xk2}u\zLj(9VmE1}}~j!χ&$nj5u<+k'CX Ed_n5dQTL}pL a:Z `6uQg0i Ь,En ]cy8=da]8ГĬVm0m6V M]:m[An&%fb'qbIE~n'?Hw;2]h>j҅:i䳔2!5wezqb5~VMePZ$5)) ̕Ss{ kTa)ˊ#q{.*G×&^8E3'/9CĔ)g-pn.mv#D+l@4kI/AY3T+/A#\xBV\QXw ŬX=ީhҬ.l\cuxk[ΥKRh!g ^# żpݴ*2nV%Lڊ>֊|-- [Ls?7Xtn/ldU!ߞAx$ Q+H.Ow_z*Q?tFF.G~ᒼ%A^NpyKLTEv{{}ñDsy֎O-]9Casts8y4=F;l޼_eD3yh75cJhBBOϤe ;:kGĬYD7[3سF d憖]W˖_) u}7eCBOdȟ}.N^`8vzӴ{yv y{aEmK!9J7cxQB-{eGQu@zN&GJvu wj= ϛZ䫸M#Ä0l~ݷ1)}YQɴQү wnG'lFj'QlI'ex0!;tj3ox9%h'pRTGFf/u{*SжfH}64v p -Ej aE !!+st^+Z1lژ眘7WmNJwY I ddN)rMlf}'ӈW _^Q٫n\k8\Qr]u=C u?VJLG:5_gW)шj"p[}7|3TMYYWQN_RFVV-gKw+ku]й*39Aoɺ{'iMӣxohKoҟf{7oȎY_gݭr6m9{ɺJ7DodרٳФE>"f|#a PBH楣N͛axv.@ }gpitel1\,WO%6v#2-4- }"uDU(2 7ꈦ0_7(8FTybD䄉G0!ӄp0]ԆYo2FӄӰF8V&mr=Y̨:[k~\7K46VgcB"J!<fƒoMhn8 Be&:t() Q]R[hƄlsIdsWI': a331G=m>ƃ [ dǃdBuv{awfB__,;\mfRΒH?}߈77Z&<|kxvKNeVO tbϒS(}ƽ=nJDO3dfvw;᭭ ;C"ZY1'x투PaV[RFDq^BWvHuAev7y} le-pZ-5;ԭÒ4mo~R1i OyxzsXZw dr);w[El^w5s8"6Гw7ܞBeF\yXw+{V7pݽ? Jyh?Mx$˖\EƖZ/ʙZhU߸ġ~%xW<#dM:H]΍񚠻ajKYsn=|kʘ2f٢>Kx躏M:J[x;\ʼnbkgHZڞww\UW~exD)w'͂DE qRW~7/&+).dwG-;9Trz7Qqg3N vJHaΡ4AtElTD&3D!y!hbEH겥8VZR}@]HTM IF^jtXQ >޸N ASTNXBQdEbPai E{aHNIN̾BL WUh Ӛ*za4 $y7iB˲}rb&:u*[TnE2\-;܇0= h۷HsceR9gd2dף])o2\4ЬZtۻ88'!-AV0`Epr(E *Z)AI.uvI%P(Y۴)\k5jBkAx^r<{uX,.,օi KFFWǰu4?ܳɞ=C3|îŇ39¹s=ugc A,B&~2ƣ=u˾8=/9|?pWsgv̜}uKoO|_]+sL'evq_O;68KK"\)&t4E{rm~z{?aX-cdhb +ܺ;<1q磗}2K߰X@Kb A, ť# sss}ٙ3g׵«r疻Yղcm۶Ǐ+X%gyX,*q2Y@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % X@Kb A, % bIENDB`pbDdd/=Z  c 6Aall 4 PTba=l{8+Mea na=l{8+MePNG  IHDRdlgAMABO pHYs  "tEXtSoftwareQuickTime 7.3 (Mac OS X)#mtIME 2,, IDATx \Sc9PTPR1 4rPNBGLQVh`ej =T,Sװ,B P@lɖ vy^¸;=w}8UEE{L%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%H Yd `%HM"''端*((:hbHM#44T(Ξ=)(() Y4GqoП6mB$H̙33glժUttrrr2,I+_̘L&sww?׬Yz׮]u]>;;::*4%㩰ժ#󤦦Nd.)!Y4Mf+WڵkJJJݛcH A:4a„6m$$$ ㏍vLSd P<==7InmLn!Ygƌ 8}tv )+H~˗;88уp2nG񱲲矇 u8!e%@R)MJ믿1c<R&q YVTTq\cR&@sCW^ILL7nܡCx #j(Ld Pٳ+WWӧOp#ChH}g}JJJ^2%ѣGǍN<9|piHM_ 2ٳgsNSBx|H͛˖-۰a4 Lǁd -F:uԘ1c9bF6R&@ YBKٿ~֖p)Q!YBqƥKv)%%ɉp ),:vرcx'N1p HBeee <֭[;w:!eZA]xqɒ%7n:S 0HhZoooDꫯ㏭[:"ӂ $Khq,Xc}\c2Ce֭/رcrr3:L% 'N=ztV?>rH1HHR߃ *--ݾ} eBKd -\.ښxg;tu8)Z$Kp۷o9fJ/!eBKd ~W鋣Gzyyq%Cˆd ŋ *))ٲeˢEE@Kd ֭[ʚ?۹eA˃d y׏?_9 ,В%K6윜ܱcGiѐ22 Yٵk׼yڷop02!YE9uꔗ׽{~G>X0H`,rzxxܼysƍK,:R&#$Keee/ҹswu8`R&$K7nѣGGq +++#Asd R\\h⡾+VуKsΦoܸA[pE 2l˖-+//o۶?ؿO׮][ju`TH`Xnnĉܸ?55o߾&O:C nHOO>};a}6NFr*u2~x`mV5kpKII & W\?… Č9r$??(؞:Sd `%H Yd Sggf)ͷ̄ YAA.M~iLfțm CS Ԇ j-j@Y*He\:hUFmdZDEjPO5Rx._#b7wKdC2w 3 Q_ D%2aɒ>W|T8fu]~ |UHVI۠iα]Qv[yA&q@{]nS!ɫWnEjD&h4 )ӲǦ /*49tJDNEA:%2KIT$iB iS/ YHlaEN]rL# g )**JLDH*tOa-d1sRhYU Okm:l[6n^}FKٚLƋ:/|zMj  KTh4VEpU)Hav KҘLK KX5'G!-Ld:Eɬ?G+A4%p'!ӃdRԺ1 tU m!t +"OOGc{eƒnK:g꣫\]0ԕ0'mz?%Ub񰾮9jEw(#D9cQPrPWz?:W ҭKk`24jmdoTT\J'0GZCEyS9{3U'!*'%}zll۔=~j).cvꖩdқYAﱲUhDsWٰkr;RBE>"G>ls~jwl4xH mvZvv~gՖyц'.oͮeQƐH ǯwiAӎ+ܡ ;wν/+RMUj2yt Ww{9nhk\;*!˥ wIG v?Gqeh5eL i6 oO[P'V זVVf5ɼW.N/'6t,6ilw,[H]_ɞcm'txĪ-]åR+o{M<&ECQ #<SP5 e`> f9rt0]AHQȒ ,9UQQ[-Q#sh:'{40I*O_0ZZ"[08>1m'4MͲ02PWE~!nFFykBYQ$7>DW~,":*/'4%XIn0$]'DH_j{-Kw[FHJu0PwZ? ;ʖFaFZ.WU-WղMj-M:^誳& *ru}1ת rF҄{YL5 jL8 k,_gy~L0jLBYjWk5y50LJk Yd `%HTSj#@j 0oG0I Q&xE6#.t,Ɏ^'+R~UX%#d߸`rj}|WpCT5jr\o!\fge"F/QVXR!`:bf1#N*5Hq0{ifؕUț|Z&,D=8ʄM7Bbu N`Gt#^:;}#Cv=KVscl.q*XaWZP{fk`e"rndb03VM1F] LԃLnXkL%wQ-d۶ccDY} M9veك4'$K0QD҉;X3{5vŰ8~Tm 3VḬn6ݶƌ1tXǎȠ.bsR{3ؕϋgY:*ܦƀ(Gr]hZp"cPE|;l4*![ZmstxPJ FL#!LWQ&!D**5ձ縎JjLi|ʹ+G 0W/j9sGc3] L0S<^ˀ] f7/t Dѧ/|>666\Sr'Q0h$&+ [ Ya}pʕ+n:u͛7[nmmm=b͔SL: o߾]*r{e˸"Zd۷]]];t萘HSfHH|@_pX\D&L;w;w?_~ xW~/_u`9вs3fdz*::zȑUoIR??L[[;v[ -K0'7͔'NȨ))Pp²25MF_p-X ,l?t@>wz =zt֬Yzڻw!C'X,$4,R3gΤIh/OɔԳ>H|z--K0&NzN:ڵח3gμ~I -K0{}CrԨQ)W_}9v|OOիW -KhvyyyӧO_۴iCSeZjuP {TAݻO>\G@o߾ ܺu4 8ٹsaOlllnڄ}iXh.eeeU=|ys̔M)))AAAJrƌofii)AQe "))iڴi/_vpp/_u#jٽ{/uD`$hYBj!!!#F22%gܸq]?~!h!в;u_>00눚Ŷm}]J~,%4of b4<\GԌΝ;wY@u3fp4#&PZZ:eʔ3g*%KXv$~.]zmtqCשSO~GGǯۛ눌*>>&˂ݻٳ$,4͊+3X,h7n>ݫV˃%4<䓟}󹎈c۷o_l{޽{ %4Ʈ]u?|LLL߾}$?~HOO[l9s&@iXx477omB{;2e~%''_#f͚5yd\uPвGp3fd_ў\GdN8A+g#F:"x,hYB/[ۛf7x###^^^Əʕ#G~вê?iӦٳgsرcqww{>\G%/LᑖLHϟ>_~%@c YC;vѢE+WLJJ۷̙3i$`vpvQڈqFϞ=3l0#2{oڽ{H$:"h(,6Zx_fJR%2e5jTFFիW_y+Vs%@4A_ӦM:" _s΋/~LZG6{xxL9tPڠDl&{ϙ3gϨ(#в4Lۏ?jժ֭[ϛ7oΜ9A(6"0Ӭy֭[!CpQ}WHN>8((IʩTڴR7܇{Թ澱ְ<%1âyY.\u fȑ#:j5, Yd `%H Ydi\p":Ԃ8tDRR,њm~zs90,O#ȥO>_H~@,%+3wxNl_nlj{fSnRyt=gf yPfڟt` HnH!q[zgח[UR%oILaVJ~IZinӆmx;HRܕB_Ϥ{3&{$4w 'M9@.:?!tEyYYiqgPQ\kiO)!ҹ+g}GD)w'͂DE qRW~7/&+).dwG-ؽ*7HσTQ'l ޔ@_|/YdܺWl^&@[SIuӌNn:##c#?EpI{ /ukםQ[;v}Y1_N[OeeM[N#"O톕:LZC|gM0`qqq[nmeJ#Vc`l"Vir4" b˄hb QxZe Ø55)Ldp IDAT+4EV$qEzai EJ3ES¬?KS!a*T&ո:|4pSS2:bVuN L o ST%`XR<22?z۰iklw޲fjlMxVmO5jmrbfi)!"#Mdv> \;K|]B܇P/$KGZm2Av.-5 EIC岇6<]F[9mx+ 릌 iz_8[.N/;)ӭb1[Q!^}!969wޛNۼXZ|#^_m0*Tjϲ[d\ì**-j 90Q^&=2Bi|/ߚ%\iѳ9|z9c#hЀ&N3pL ' wn(O]g:=a@4S]iS*;׫fZ-'%<{HyKdiᴪ}fg.}\F>~|v!R%bn륽BX$K '1\<ͺ ih5d{Cu "0^SUݬK{K$fi6Rw/J Ksv <)j /'g.-,KsY`+8ٳ1e"B /ІGs/\ >׳c㗤e%7Xܰ6ٛ`ߎҞҷɳ^9˱Ձ;𜥑4%$ٶٳ0< 8>/:x&xPSԕ+M%2Eq]LA#JQTc]~!4Ee/i%ջYx/험EIwY%t8 kF왾ă\1:GNEኝ;3*[ -1Бɜ,^"~WDb7|#=ŧ/4͎i0=frQ3<ݬWd{ OX4 av1w{ef{5!Yf0=t6^յW*MսFW9ڶ)9zS3g뎴URSvCNeg[^!;ψ3c}QhjrP-ޢ8cm_^CD\R#ﵤ8Գo1}:9˥ wIG v?'%LΖ֞;@sU}Wԙ^uzi?oS E$M 23e5rq}h>k`α" .tSD)s)~~"Ct].""HttKL# EE"?3q6^gjݬzh/ ݵ91XI湪yKҊk|;rH~~… cʨ6sJq&jTˋĦRZ4]U'ZkiZ]o-QzvD\f 2-B{.IWyj4Ж\DI}kZa;[lUX\yeפfoݴ/0λQ-3E:,nCgfi DM5o6r.a @0aP^^~'|r:t0Q*O#fP(RRR4͈# F<#F"WZeccch ᅲdZ}7:wU0j,XЧOGGIIw}G]t8qiٸ$H-ٳgbq~~P(ԩSBB͗ס\~erСwIKKstt<|;ס@mfiwذa4So'O\dIYYرc7ut-_|M3wӧOO2`Ĉ::x=A3[~O0_ݻW5}ΝVV̠+//0–F/+[niӦoҡ/,ź{oMm۶~D"ر#-yMG۷oر f%{ɓܹcNHpСb/^tqqŜϟ?o[ ZݧOzj;55[nL&3f0H(##W^h+ /_\a;tpqD%$$t W)/|ڵ^x~ꩧD@4Ga?7nBh,ZvѢEU4"##+sm;wt'|om~HeÆ O;w믿>΢gy.n[g}d޽333gQ]v4hPAAASE di/z8GRzh_\.5j] meҶ/_Yi/1/ʕ+nnntݻwOKK{#A4oG1cƔ5b5M@@],۾}{S-ꫯڴiCko֬Ywm*J___v< Y*//M++]v5ߊKKKoE@P7֕͑#GoE{i۶-]ju Y7oD"zdieee9;;չ\pWg._<`ZK={h՝>}K.tu/ҍ7{udifΟ?+د_/g4={zzҕvQ"gf$))СC Ҽ{MgϞ5JZ,$Ksr㫯j䓢cOܹӘ6qIѷ~'E Çjl67ndc -?U<\nܷ h4rر`~'aѣGߺu`8T*}||9:m0_5̙3adiJJJF^/u8s999ѐu88p =zs#11aذaFn r Y짟~s}#F`;;uv>7xׯs}.]ruuK*rEA4]'N`q\S[yy9sخۣHvk>uT|Ʊlر쳞?X$K`f=Π`޽{V2^Xl{g}u8T L%M\cmM6MOkRn߾=qDv(p m}opP$K"˽1C'N:Jza^tpիWyu׿OiSNuܙ/syC4!.\۷/==YYY\h FOLL:&HC&qΣ߿? ܹs\`Ɛ,M?ܱcGz\9rdII 4ݻwgΜ_sNkmmM7TT\n=z4[[۟~pI/w1yb-?{Ͻ{BBBy֬Yu8EmiݺM,!YrȖ,YbaÇ QǏW(\ܹ3yd?mV߿pΝ;/d-? ɒKnz}ǎ:tٞ={M0`@^^yō7^z%]t9}44ș3gz) /@&4 . tvv68dɍN:cֈ#,~Z=}tm۶ݽ{7p'|F;iҤ;wpNs)--fO:dɁHܹs[գ?Zܻwpl~T:hݺ֭[ Y??:9x`v*JéAR[46>o>1۷]*.XhnHSVV믳O\cliiiݻwv+((4h199pɓvvvtGe$K#>wޙ\ÍԵkWSL,;;g@0p&~Wv`ÇqT*)3&L}6pW^UA[u8ɲ}Wfͺ{.1{I,Xf\`r,?{ﱷ|\cZ[97xØiiӦOٳh5 [liݺ5ŋkZ0!HEPbzqqq\c㏪^j5V'~3N|||hy{{r@l/_0`=3##pLL&sww7NrgϞѣ]s=g^=睝iE\xpLeKJJrppǚ!CЦ :Z^owS{ݼyӓVWǎ% pɲEGGmۖe~mZu8NseYyyyhYYYܹp8֊#XaE;ԩS+V,^W׹sgۼ-@@ӊ 0BCCv={6l0iҤ(˻v__Z"##njӬR^'܉'a]Q:ͽ.]>>>젾O>h^hS*۷g ?V={Buxvx̋)wT*Sq@ XLsHKII|ʕ+_pCjnGϯ-eQ^P:$K, @0ꡕZ%״EI'8Td)Iֱ[;2|Sp"[i̐:5Gk'(=WQɒk<{{eDGn;c.LQ+lRWf/Tb *EU%jH)e)75j[`{׭lǀd eA~~AA 7552 Ru .JOeVZynjRznn\Ο+1eWfzf~eBQ榧&yuwMHhTQځ~#,Oy+VZ .WZ鲙5 g?5x8' %㭬)pjIQsh* D v̗].!sD~bc.wR]l-]~rӞKw$zdYYAֽ'" H:Jbf_#T9 )QH#t/싐)9tkt5̮H?e”Gܺ:ճ]e] qxJaIAouhh~~Bw| awzbOk.M?r*J > %'vy)1:Ș=ْ+ $0e4{=LkΎSN7qn鱛W~=̓zʆ\Vgۥn",m>G{E IDATu?!{s2**2.S7Ш4E]P*{zxђuL!?֠kRm[ʯ:(n/`kuvչ]ʢ!ryԊ~%6OII4,L9U\4:X?/BwD+,S3W%aBD7P,Q"ce46L0,>! ilfv0,+W LiP h*t/uo7XX6har_Mb6s/75xD`gWm NxҒyog>\]Н*yD?l.:}7X :\Q9ih 9Yo/E\W,\MI S8QK<6':yyu;^^ !3TcZյ(l!TcC6 B|B5% ?L?[/u +\!Y>矕4٥EF\ݡտO@@S/5ye;%z/awѬ]ez?\I8cm6S&m[N}t $KMw1!ܪYiӡ7}oEԚW$?ZRJ:ٽUUӧrC2,%תERC=[Urki3~j Z1t]X9u.q6y.bO:t")o&-pe5 K7Gpcd?=o+?NZsO<*K8Y&s'cuk<޵=_~]۳[7׭:Xk2}u\zLj(9VmE1}}~j!χ&$nj5u<+k'CX Ed_n5dQTL}pL a:Z `6uQg0i Ь,En ]cy8=da]8ГĬVm0m6V M]:m[An&%fb'qbIE~n'?Hw;2]h>j҅:i䳔2!5wezqb5~VMePZ$5)) ̕Ss{ kTa)ˊ#q{.*G×&^8E3'/9CĔ)g-pn.mv#D+l@4kI/AY3T+/A#\xBV\QXw ŬX=ީhҬ.l\cuxk[ΥKRh!g ^# żpݴ*2nV%Lڊ>֊|-- [Ls?7Xtn/ldU!ߞAx$ Q+H.Ow_z*Q?tFF.G~ᒼ%A^NpyKLTEv{{}ñDsy֎O-]9Casts8y4=F;l޼_eD3yh75cJhBBOϤe ;:kGĬYD7[3سF d憖]W˖_) u}7eCBOdȟ}.N^`8vzӴ{yv y{aEmK!9J7cxQB-{eGQu@zN&GJvu wj= ϛZ䫸M#Ä0l~ݷ1)}YQɴQү wnG'lFj'QlI'ex0!;tj3ox9%h'pRTGFf/u{*SжfH}64v p -Ej aE !!+st^+Z1lژ眘7WmNJwY I ddN)rMlf}'ӈW _^Q٫n\k8\Qr]u=C u?VJLG:5_gW)шj"p[}7|3TMYYWQN_RFVV-gKw+ku]й*39Aoɺ{'iMӣxohKoҟf{7oȎY_gݭr6m9{ɺJ7DodרٳФE>"f|#a PBH楣N͛axv.@ }gpitel1\,WO%6v#2-4- }"uDU(2 7ꈦ0_7(8FTybD䄉G0!ӄp0]ԆYo2FӄӰF8V&mr=Y̨:[k~\7K46VgcB"J!<fƒoMhn8 Be&:t() Q]R[hƄlsIdsWI': a331G=m>ƃ [ dǃdBuv{awfB__,;\mfRΒH?}߈77Z&<|kxvKNeVO tbϒS(}ƽ=nJDO3dfvw;᭭ ;C"ZY1'x투PaV[RFDq^BWvHuAev7y} le-pZ-5;ԭÒ4mo~R1i OyxzsXZw dr);w[El^w5s8"6Гw7ܞBeF\yXw+{V7pݽ? Jyh?Mx$˖\EƖZ/ʙZhU߸ġ~%xW<#dM:H]΍񚠻ajKYsn=|kʘ2f٢>Kx躏M:J[x;\ʼnbkgHZڞww\UW~exD)w'͂DE qRW~7/&+).dwG-;9Trz7Qqg3N vJHaΡ4AtElTD&3D!y!hbEH겥8VZR}@]HTM IF^jtXQ >޸N ASTNXBQdEbPai E{aHNIN̾BL WUh Ӛ*za4 $y7iB˲}rb&:u*[TnE2\-;܇0= h۷HsceR9gd2dף])o2\4ЬZtۻجĎ֕I.rބݦn[?.5\5lCx+n1١mǂn,q޶.JI&Pwڄ=O[(c?x@yS=ߧ}=W}n}UUUgy9nUx-?v;{j^n5koqh|SG'c^RSS56.m^NO _}S_lEk^V]{_N~Y5˚nmfjzSpWfVp\Nd~o-UUWnKgҶ{߸nfG4S=ڮC{ϐ Ŗ%TVU5[_in_7}?vWPsgJq>dS;o~՗_w8~j92D^@, K@, 8#>:288sgq8pƹvB>䃕s2oyb 'ď̙3wq]w쉜`C[[[+^5gΜUVuwwYۿŋ+^ngǁ I, jw^{{O^>xɓ ?7G?Y3cFֳwSW?+W_Qسg%3 besa/=XP9gt͗]2}=;l}z \q/O+1jwh1ut =;Peɑn֊Ǹn6O{[[[{_{~rEmUe8RN9c[o<,k^Z?(-:wۓ OW|ɛok&5̜-fJÍ=46k|3aṕpxn_uuvv>#הּ,?7۰(+-+6¼aۭ<4ŎBk^mi,d`]{iuy~٢<%]#+kxq5-klyq)|}Ls;^glYrB߼RuV.˩UK cֵwth k}fKܿyP{k^y=ڿPS8_׽/=qBiŭWM==}ɣzG0J,9!v(_4_G V]4v>u얔6≲#ӛoܸ8Ǵ8|Ռ{w/o/LiÁw^]6Zڅ [8C>?^;OG7б<^)"Tv>8~˟=66,ȳװ}ߓ?Ý;oܴ3^}-MhŢν{ʳܲѳ70ɱ*̳;ӳҼ<˗LLb Q=ш˯]w>s/-lz/_^~iMy˟)m8V]\Q(4E?{voSZf߿oY U[,}zu4.*nҡyZkY\n{q|{oON}۞_T~R546ul;{}{蓭e;ulYfw]{w֪q|ZȦ+nl]wi+Z-XRZConx3t uǗΠ ٲ{Pcۺwɾյet:muCŹ8?˟!pjr.FmذaҤϓޚ)j?c\PXU]](N7pnPuuU޾bUCCxZW iƝ &*G,aLixumq-x}h=RMY}%bIey"Oq`BK*;YNq`BKḑ !X܇ٳg8p=%%gϞ3B&@G` R4[O+rJDDB&@G` `=== {?׎  X4(ooȑ#r@`%@s͛'HO?Ջ dIk֬qpp0`1Ah}}}\?0zhSB&@{BhL&RVc8MBhxzz^tiՑlh 2Z%_{5sԩLւ` G]^^NC… .NkBxxƍVO.N@xtǟ>}zĉ_2 %tu~~~111Æ mll.N{@_Хm޼yʕ}IOOwvvf8 !,'M#(%X2B.筷ڵk/c] !6KZoo٥ 2ttFЅ}z~k:L\y{zz޸qc˗/g88LDI?s񇟟ݻ. :?^;~رcO-7RL=W]]]]&mhY:g甙G@N%Vv:!K`>`cE_MgXY9ytv\|DP'r'$d0v:pߏ [euqM|1A1xz) Z %6(3y!DnveCy{BOd/D[6Ꜣ.i 2ᓾ׆jo9$޳_o~+׻?s՟L^+i+-YGB>P躝 _ч]4G? ?_zb!õ! xE>ْZDq,Na3jqoy"o]3ޙK䏡>a2Kׄ LϜX~L߹+`#s_pȗ箓~QZa[C h.erL]ᏏoalԞ145N#g^n0j;V%X*s֯_ߪYR"!-t*ӳŧ' D^s*)IJ $2M*3ѮXRd_\MsRQUUUY]U:ibUaL$ YJNj2Et**U-A$&&n߾5UxDbY㨲Okפ8ɈNGk?ifB"R4UV*i"3Fܚ_WOfe)L1Tr?C ²h,Qe_`гVpq/vK8} n,PШNteh ZXz鲔&ᐫtwJ}1;akF&$kdLx,.ο=DbێOLp2+#v$?$ϊt5 ѥD83CG*gPt7œضN^Mr{1zi=?jēՋdSB7ޤm"ND^C2ƍ+ͭ60h 2g,cJCՒAy>ٰǰ^6*:\C=A&Yf*ldO`t}2vT?lKdӣ5'kUג I.Гc{ sm?q CL3Mee5YwG wRZz:=Q,1q&!B_#>C0 ]%C_iعݾ[dq= ! }a{Ҋ%C,C&J?@[!qƥ?}Vy44ժBR1m:\kxSc.mc񇌦AQUTs46A)d__dR߲V :9hmy.p/ G: N& 2}G1eUU:E sS$IWU2ĆuhD`@,!V|_j נU*55zuSViU/Fj&*mcΪ&}ZJõW/HZ۴¹&8|[:3xfv|[:9MϫIFm)FkLrXϩ- ,@0 K3,~NXKZjSSkS&8%+6"_#˥e2QƍY%3F=#rsK~՛2xaOaSke{ `{T>)̳)@*43(*X Oi>д5ʄ!!̩ٲԳńq5>c<K47ZЦp:O:os|Nuߛ5&cc`gt0ASB'` TçLd|n0$wIƘL{[czn]{i|Z@HJ/hp0r1^ <-B}^ ɢeeK=8Fۜ)AU2@xJ3FVZ֖Oڦ)}xb#2 #Dp{yysCXC>{FʱcfggǗ_~W_-(( !!!zz+W̛7~0f͚Gam۶mWjF:p3X_eee_iXzg..iG:::zΜ9l:vV-Z4}t)ߎ)o遁s}7p,=84k֬ .gϞ=SLaDM:q]0c@%??3f ƍȑ0a-I ׯ_~2,̙3޽; V֭ۅjw}Wь9...lX` mo֭[ F͈#.}?=޾}{+U a׌Cٳg-1RR4̧XBVϛ7͛7.+,MΞ=ҥK}٫vZA~ /]"h'YB+!!!cǎH)I]?wtYBkϟ5k/"##.Qرc;Ch<==p@` f޽oJ>|8 !.Q?boo>=gΜ˗/;::~>>>l]%%%`YTTO߿wtJYƒtk׮}iD]-RRtͧ~:,ſkϞ=7mvXsUV9p!C.Kx{1^{v:s,>m۶]"h8 ƍSLYd B "e'|2--=X`3J%ۅV%܇SN͛7OPD"fDɓ'iEٷoرc.<,E*++WZC#믿Hٌ*#gڴ&"}׳322~>&4ٲ𕕕֭Ѳ!ī/ohӱݳǾ'ܿ֯%xoڷoP(DRYܭհ¾4Dlƍʰ/Z)г:ޜ&::lOհհM FqPFQ%'=ZַIi-0+СYnpuqqT:ML9eFp s)>^?ɬQC9].cqꜣzM3g7q mfLP`L8^Tㄈ3>Ypߏ[6D2=Q.u) N{0Owt"L:–h CFS?9E4TF<5tNy}6O"[n~WJ %Wq(zhPяOtݴ"iR,ED_/8sI?pP-G9hK28Ti _Ei5xK_DSmnz=1Yso˼>·I$˰дx纳7մ9ɤ|Ĩ/6ҶɱioD$;e==b*3ز!q)ʻ[!H:q`BJ6{Z4q ;VFw'zNF/S{ f2Q³LO\o?f4A8T`8$\kkx\SE 6NtA^o;fݔc(ÄqChe+pTEo Rfi*݁Ri| ^CJWzDǥiT{YSw=+hotu7վGOWhޠҬ-H@`{k;} G̭7XGԹN>Q(oܼIWHDun͵N&4^׽A c!4 ]^CdO؞"uI搣uw.~4D%;[Jego3Ը-,*[ӭ"zQ .^{>-vF`:os5qjTO`ֵ70$8mUkDYZ\o-Enj:70nu@i4YE%9Gc j_.[hh:|jnnQմ%jAMuzݸP>UU( "aHsJ'VS+0\rJ1NNbI#A`zq(Ry1K0Nd<B&Jdt IdZ$Ua5K,>ج>uk$V1sbTKWʫ8-lw wBKfƦI9U 3]{/JÁʒB-*Ȓ$g xc+%B/_Z<&`ŘZ3x#f,Zq:o@@kgs?\l<%mN@iNN[bJ!NT%n_5^<`tU)? 3aPvLDQ3j( )A 9H{Dw43cF:z>NH- AQݻ=_sM1‘Ȝ*-4^"+TZu¨lؕlk̐9˜yXHˢ(̶থʴ<"JR@(1O3Ș`S^& a*5#ft DĢtV5Vt&b_uaaҥK"udʼn̲Co"Tx:OõUs }#VoKZȮՋםVtV1HLgKp~HC<[5Й4З]H_J51 ^k3R í۷rX\5rw kRwn[ݨy.wY:,t'rzG3VǷ#|0r9PӰf XӰYYY,ԩS={1bD޽Y,ɃQw}YfTtN7vX+++ kOGډR 6mЀqBѭ[7_o߾lz徖bQVVW_ѿt_~ӦM|L,~M$ >}$''x/]K*C)njSQQx1eG^^^4RϧNZ|yyyInv麨O?LJFJzO?͜9hرbt#A|(((?{n.yŒ%K*++Y,aW G}t˖-? f@'j7ӺsܹsNGaTjggGx{{߸qKݼyx&Jm>3f̨h@,;1c}CjjjS.\J 2ܹsY.O>ťp<<< E{` egg4mKOL:>>>4q޽O8>%삒aW) KKKO|gy&~)!4믍??xT*UK˖-3^EÓBLL ŋ[x_/l@ӑVF; :ڵ>ml$ɺu޽;wc}CKk~ي] vMbK,i?͛7YۂҿnݺXv!XiӦi;k46̝;wnݺEݻwݻ}BwŊaVV֜9sX"IZViѣdB۔,m_chLF9'0d\gch7fR{]e}RnϞtNW#tkAj@ubWf3g4*aG\u]Of4yyytw3_Ε_]2Y5`zF~v]oQnn˵rr*pU@+*tܞ6v&89;Lk3~9+L;zv[q2ئP[czSe6B./m#CiEKk^JUVi+fAWWbc?:W"Ip3UXP hzcjM @e[iu 5^%kEWcENvey1MTqKW=S# \!;]/٧4d<.UhoH)L {θʒ}\;W0dǵ(N,Ǻ.a1>wqm]~üt$%Jlv=UJ!;[LQo]]zXZZv5^p|㻴3}$f'gH۱hwQui4)RtrՕ9Wմ-AMS 8mZ;tU;fWGt<xo }n\wiϩk`f9| W5&~vxUBCT2]3* T}saqqiӐRd _{un\S#|ÂO%Y;fm̨^gNީ],]bօ{Ŷ2\$-u56rޯ1PsՏ(1nQ⏅>:) O.I_I7yF'y˙~\#9[cI^èjj6m<7 4G2#Blzk&5ժ Z:wr6UiP "00F3~FH$DQ1}aH8Əd)$AoD(.2A2yR!Y@!7̔XdX>>Y4jmWkli=Ԛߦw6^ƒ D ;Ydс-Ӻȋ4}Uz@?cDn/hU /^oM kڔɔFK[i骫U2C8]]B$yڍ. (6 AQQuZTEad|}>KxDϱ5潆^V4c]o~ MiZ1ce[Vj_>>7d8etglR(222t]ۀ躞zꩂ6]E;wܐ!ChE^pt/55kFM2l1c.++CZ;fujiܸqۛVT*e8CleGt/3w\Vvq,ß ,,󏌌|fwzRee%Khqݻw]u[tvX=5kXvo֫۷/ݑ5h]+VGtCojҦZyW'L>5K.m={'j4l2??ڴi.Znv𣬬9sZjc=fCv@'OfZ6͛7{ee|FC}X3 ?pD"ztvAZYzz~G/__ti;}ׅ~V4iea u3,@0 Kh^YT.,٦/I=yԒԙvNNcw40dKdGeiYZ0+СYJ I XcORui3x!V6uuީcB4&^)9eacfi埚2?,R(32rJc(799֐FmIVӷ+3R z򹩩Ze VI_rr :?+#.kx`B7>F J2]WzIi.[níڣ\֊C'C' ;d^_$z/Y>ke5~:|1A1xL\|XUfH&W4=ʥ ?P#~ 8s!"?QDR a*a9ZM%Jf9δW/t'qS?[df%=)32pyfx.3]f.[j?"]$BǘOeF?Yfƹd+TdWmOrO!}h;%W6\=$/])MM KUV}g/1b8UQ>t"e76388wæ~ =1++^mѦ5vש7mnݐ+h^/vO-mYO~Ri_`fqNj&9|X ˦h+L!vnCz^Rq{0Qy\3i":\ kcp8LX,$X̰ /2Uzbʭ.eTI8BS\á}G~SϜROb>NݺͯxI_d|xs÷5blmz=uQ2ʙC]KQkQ{,Vc8N%DЉKWJr a/ L\ڣzl ybhcfΊ݆?bwN;&thwLSulgxJqmGu:eêPtqzvO\ӕ <6\ !!=iE!GMqK ;G_$R5JIX!޹sſY[%<' Z9zݜZ/u_oC Z%ōVkJ2G|ltdYE%9Gc j_.[+a,p;xkLUQiiT2DFf<5KөP5TQRFgE)813;$AR4Ld#)RI# E*@?ʴ,%x/EA 4d$7~9ʤ"5EyV# %D$5zRW_`6lsͲTj1-]pAHi+!)mm ^enu=saۈZ.!|[Zsxj-+[2y<[/<@ȵ>8ٱեQڰ9ܳT:+ڰǪ59:J"4ٱ5y٢<ɲ̭)kgԬ۹rmqWc]٢6F75@oN\3ꬓ?=ȐF_ I?5uFG1T_CDB*K u~Ȓ$g xcn D_#M@3)IMPb?d7}қ|Tf:7 "6IT.o[d9ns{7`Ko 7 3幍8 w28}RLy뻦g[?e[\.Ac=sޛNך]cM,ґ kkYFOC.dd̢ׄ܌\ushu/Jbz ԹLFؾ]S۷:K#/^Č7K)Zeaaah[Ji78ҍz}d{tݔ8t.5m1bO=z25WF&ZWntwZ~_vLvZzVՊWwxz{/:ʹ2V|/maD4W9o|c@'';B=QgrpWVK%=ݍzjI,“O Z6¢On,ZY~*tUЧCk=ހ{OfzEɛE.g6Fxjϧ~ n2@BE#t#3֝Ҭ~"o. gݹ: GuBSQ~Qs>5>vA,uÖ?laگv` ;s%~RӄIi糔/(`lyhuY9oWLy&1<23]2ﴌ fκw#vo{79DL_PGL~rRQDv:ݜ{ n2@ >ݡ9'B{~ ɗ7@lSx_Jf>l mE0nYGbav#d~]c1 xkSΥg$I]{B sWNF(➹H^\ƭ8Xqcm YIPڏMt8:t? Z^a#Sm|y:|R6*aʋnM 2i䛋ܑ7gY[% rOxm[³7|Tjkۮ60`)S(c{"K7n[e61[F-E}CexWg'?q+8VbVVaLӅ L s)n'6 32oSn\BdMw9,X1YC]V+nVq9]7`+[n={9NuŞl_n9,lȏ4N^|x(|l\ҧ9gGFn-"6|!V" ]pz&wQ͎ZsQy#F̷(>(qR=O1ꇿ}/L`9Sg ܥ(;8z~+DW& #В]]gzqt^O|c [Y%Ha@k{}' I9'M 8WO;:WڷyŦ0 RO ph<֝9ٻwMgyxlonI$ݝišCh ^a ng|"%!4=|C8T`8$\kkx\S7\#VD0eUId`i_.Q+-Ɓ͆بk ϼްanGy,*O੝)J iҵ5\'x=n{Nvi0n.$!n=U$#H-4Fka5B| HH׌%ѣYz=iOglm?zSk)IG}[$le-=r$FK|'~=[r Twgu1ߛ}tic\Օ8dK3'.soϯVV8x}oYx޽b(kh{f*|Y߱Sc(NQ}0\*trskoMe7?l$_77{?KjJsԯ9ouG>d0: {d*97Q7mzڴއ "S}}/2HOM?NpX_=+|꯮M]^ܔ_?on]¦p)NNg\9pSFmUKg8ܳkƖ#Um[̛g ۱$LNOVk[Z_k}tmVƚO870)<[n􉛊/>p}lii]t,vjcG_5 eCvj}8|/oߟV,SXA.poyzop+p}|'g_z踝u|%7~cF͎$ɇ\Q^oYp_hnIjҟ.?-8etKIۧ|$E[?W}X?d8W#}7J%vvP]5چK IoD޼SvWg5G˿4~y|m kwnZe'neK+-޽^[_65K6gwځ-wߠ!߹#}pV[7ymoaWկݽx}W>!9ׂ0e/?8_YxÉZֶ|td36:%&;g!9qf CˤO{j_~M:l sY=ߩqxsf g]䎣M[x\roQaƤic!&p63ן ;ap|t !a K%b qqH>fǎ+Y>;&yNJ- g[2c9s̗^zf.\pO]wu֭kiiȻt=z{Snj-88;Y@@, K%naó;QSSgfbI~{O[scxw444pIKʞy,^xw1sK%C0aĒlϾc>K.=/jgՕo^z}'r$$v~YN;^1cFI9_L N:;ΚM\gvO2c +W5=s̚VҎSWroU3e6sw.t@̒yC.Sf v)+nhg왩Q3{P5:4u {}ԇ!YnٔIW+7beߜ2e_-|yV|jWѪu /I~muW^8}&My| [8oNEMMM=yy5TK6'ɪÅZ7>Qfϐ_ݲu[K:wJ?)lwscaUmw>|\xMmU;:oiyMw%ao]>̒a-]2wrj檛4G[/VMdS7W$}?-|fnY}OxmE2wev>y$]sM,G>϶oebɰn)}W03v~?NJ[瓻K ݾ4}ߴxI>lROSMLp˷/Y=c7v}n_5ks_}⹭sϬ?p Kbeӷaz>sӂ o_\q̌έ6}r-{I5kyCZoFnx۳č zhC|}}x=O X2spW?:\}=IǞH`7TjMw}ۡ[?ܲi˯Y+஍?|9>U櫴<׾e.2GV^(^ ]^ Ⱦ`‰cjɚ${ugGai`$$[|>i˅S>ŗѧקjw6YoZ-w}8ȽݿpsKjچƆU[6֖}9cҍWvn]U֪fɆ[SN Y۸f—.R%W--lWoWlTTWU肱ʈ% * LQ <[YuN럾<-eS(emeUueLia\X@@,h'RYIbFyK}90&%bɠw9X% ,-0رc#(0&%e]wݺuZZZFzG.aG{Gz/glXxb X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@L"(IENDB`]nDdd/=)z  c VA2all 4 PT classical rangebm?m+9#ˤuUkm ncm?m+9#ˤuUPNG  IHDRdlgAMABO pHYs  "tEXtSoftwareQuickTime 7.3 (Mac OS X)#mtIME  ’ IDATx \!\lAAAb=Z$Ky)j^!C[i -=eZh-%EA]م]΂dمS2̾3;<μEee%:$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,@0$K#,ZFeeennW_}UXXv,,ZFXXϟ7oҥK2$Kp?4.LBݲe R&@{d Ν;7g X|@LĂIdu֭]z?Әr.899*4%@#FM6/i\) > Y4߿^x~~X1Lsd Lqhh(yeٻwo2%@s|SNܹ2%#KOO>|xYYٷ~k@0/Hƍ)yڵ>?~U!e $KGhAJJ[ou_)!Y<3g۷oȐ!III]ti5#e2$K"lսzJMM}ꩧZcH I:4yd++DooVR&A0?{޽{g̘6vZxx8R&)@0͛^^^~'|[G0H!)̙3'NZk3 e 1gŃ ߟ|IvA` %Cmܸqʕiii}a;Ld а#GL8_~6lԅ Ж, JITT_ٳ硐2%@]^^^W\Ybƍ8Lֆd PKEEk4~C=lGTHy}W <2Lրd ͛}~N!e,$Kcǎ?:u_f; R,hװa I-c; ,۷o{yy-_|ӦMl*2%ttZvԨQO;v#G̨k3 e4%tt>3glmm- e<*$K"##-[ֽ{TiSHMd ǍOtK.GFF@x$Kpt:ѣ%ɘ1c=کS'#2-H!YB{ڵٳ]ve; P%t,۷o_d}JJʀ!e0,9yoaaaqĉW_}pR&%tСCKKKwܹpB1?HБ!YBPRRMŋmv8f ):&$Kht:oqԩ#GOR&t4H֤H$zgRRRuv8R&tHܹ300H)Id;v):$Kh~1cƐcǎ5p3Lhߐ,ݺtСCrm/^v8R&WH>ݹs;;;{…;wd;)$Khݻo8q7!!_Y %C[n0`@JJ=thH> ۵е׳ϺА2!۵rQFݿѣ?0`,}v0ᰪÐ2!۵;P(޾pL0/ܿǎ1ɓ'---َ)%4ɭڷ-Q<7|jժ>}|i_{a Y͛Q"ɶmVTTtѣ>,A5W^lGm {뭷 v Eiiinnn&;N:É'.]0222f͚n wݻww2uǔS &)ܬ ƑfP(\nہT`b; ի .\hہ#G'!Yd `%HF YT99y9y*]m0+dZ^S6PGGSPj`: ]9y%Mڡiu*z7,@5$K`*Ё yvkeo"-fGJb&7!NsŃty{dڛ]|ٲj]^{-5"S8i|#ewUey;h٭J0OƤ]EWM _$_*tRJ&ٕ\2G[)#s AttmeR(+0ߟ4ąJb*sEd!2,ނ@(aR+ 7[Lo>YXͦt!Hou۷o޲ KJ&:WZ&EItM')ZRtkU/"vRM W;JL^Kƅ5~m~,5'/%k_*矫ח {X*cH}BXjL~ps8Թ<-cȄZ3iwR)\#݄#9z?}NJ+令 D2Ɔ)nA]fme庡]Jd}= SߗI<؉[fSwTjBG6wܥa71EjZ-W5m:vi)E9& ] [8z MCd UnwfYr9 +uQ)_$Gɫk͆YھG?{kJOSi |p[?ޞ\R'&1e#] Γl"+tZAڬ;jCק-iS יTVV5IДdǔaH2#ls32tӱP._ukHRn (,:xۅO[]K+TOY w(v`Zz:7N/D CűF0<_C QhyeVD_ eWVEW kD~|fXRR*sR3g̶%|a|T.W_?$!)i'ɴ-~eQtBEnEG3 5YY)c \r?YD@Q'Tְ/V"燊mOײW/qAՆiLYAg 1jGtT%J]b%e`T%Ŕkh4˭HԔ׫:Sl a`/Jj&*%Zvis֯Ӕ(ՖvvíZ`p LggWkAgPk sk$`Qe4R:{eϩ)ax|f `%HF Yd Ls*U? YBR 0oZГLULp,?I]#򫹒]AWo]Jm>J^gP1B};s06.ui}Z|W|KPԚ~=*VFt1"~I $yTD"H-ʦ8Ai=3Fj=m> Lִͧ>Z`?eƙw*NlGex1f7k?BFJ)k?ccs~NVؕ?}j @5K0Q26;26D@&׽3 S~ւ5UbU#m$K0Q2i2 5SLsWmx/+eV0D9 Vj3WoӼ]L)K8PI(׎#c*#W^#KW.nͧ@}+'J$hC8d "U)Qt é縁g~2ek] fps?W=Bt9J0}dpyؕ`|&j&G믿rAذN***HlGA#4 +ѷA\]]/^zji;wN>}N:Y[[1ё@2َzw)JČ/_(Y+wzxxt-))?Lf f4%'O`25?_#""8ڵk_y+W#hY9uٳe2Y޽b񫯾ZT*ʲݵkobne 椢>=z4ɔoVfffLIE) 5gΜI&؊ ,l\p俌 `F ;vlܹEEE۷o߰a,Nhвs^xdJ//3%1vX|7\+[޽{m*?H`ꊋǏX^^jժ4e={eddeXX/|֎%O?͝;͛}ٻw/IxXIVVo!-T??7,Di4cǒLIR]fff2%ᑖxbB1CΝ;--ohY)yȶmyYmu;_~"v-K0-ۖ-[<==I6lXFFFKeJ7 -TZrʈ#-K0!7nܘ3gΉ':uf͚>FۺukHHFy饗׿ H`*ϟ-[us'Jmllv1sV5{&L r֬Y)^?K,QTd$q< Z3f֭ۮ]9VǏ3g͛7wÇq`в֐/jK/D2#233Yy믿N6o PNa)Cqڵٳg/:+W| m۶mŊ{߾}...Xw߽rg!i_d;"Ϗ44mllD"ѬY؎LNBRTϟ:u*ɔddJKMM "q;o6z%%f̘qҥݻGEEM4ĉs̹qI Z߿'L9rLSΔĘ1cHƍ+((]v-ztdhYBϟ5kofeeER-,,D"|Vo>WWW# YBo{;w<$ <Ǟl߾ǪsӰZ E8$_;w3%A|jjҥKU*ٳ),U$''Ϝ9ʕ+_~ovD-f={+lGm-Kha:.44tĈ$S2j3~xG}^?ZВf̘qY.qƠ #j;vxjC7,YDT4{ZO}ٳg"PZZ:}9sT))}e˖ݽ{qCӧg͚uU''zlGԦH,,,|ꩧ݋^?Z|ZvժU*ɔB033eJe'fhвf.]l޼y…lGIJ;w._o߾$Kh(r?~777#2 .\ _ 222x<޶m̙vD2p۷'M@P|ٳg) 80%%׈sN6e ԩSgϖd?b/'ObzٳgĈlG-Kh˗=d)Sdff"S6bԨQ&LpW_}?jl͇%W-[̛7Ʈ]ȗ2OO}=lǴ%!^|E)ӑ)… !C=_~%@s YC7nWNNN~YҾ{N^?faaǎ#ț7ow޽Çg;"W{Ԟ={@Se ui4%K$S2*)[ȑ#333'Nxڵ^{mժU`.вZќ$ȿV$͜9ڡ/^|C צ///)}||HLsΑcbb؎@˲$dʧݎ=f͚N:̟?LQ|~33͚'!m߾],S.Æ c;4 $69@|ja;:\pߣ.e5ORNf;4=,?oߞ;wEČ9rQB?<@{kF Yd `%HF Y-*/''//DcL1]Fv@ZCJN:t2@kh͌ #CyhHf|21U.Iӽl [ VZ:z-_;ik@VKn6;dީIC\U֡Hm| Iֶ ecztHPy(/xQvj5_I^? i2O$R—O$5doEOqLz4vd`wrv 1lUb{2eo.rUZefw+(sGduRJ: .ۅ(55h]J=& }B5"R6tt{ք~w&7?K]x,T$FlI$]6Oo)?5oyj mkan|g]ԗgs2j'K ^:ʥv 4Nݸg?6 d ׼YL0K콢(s旍]zfIѓ8w_uQ*?+=xu? |m6}]TDbq|2'VksT[)#3Lt6?L"+)J _ O+1m IDAT^(IjE R ӕPz?4WJ?[[)E+ռ:|䥴]S2:"'U[ FJ$ Կe~2[:ׯGOEK2|(6U.|F0(&_ k%E~bh:hwв4{n9kIʔhYYpK9Y6eWƺ->EmA梺ϤO2y6=os^;0r$ NqJo>*`d )d׶ؐPX<'7iEGR5o(I(}j~Vi`koi-G:M99, vN V ߺ~?] "<;:9绵Kr,} cFqp&}Ff Wo))7- ,^Ń(~5+v:uBJ %ͥ/BiîkA)?IUHZT窥,Y<\¼+iTĬ/ShXJfU %:k{\mrR+ VxBV&aJa[ *M5JD 0W_+6D߂0<_[~ٛESTT?PunQ~IZ5~ 꺟VCvɲFP"|\.7})eB yvD*O O5fd'(kEꢦQAT?JXݧY_Ԥ 7 $)BBFu4PI"lT]{4qׄd Ӱf՟9պ8є2U[P懅}iWQHWȪj3U ryWһ5f֭&.)ߛ CFkms)kN}bl[{4q@M MT=l+bbJY^t_]ayG6* 4T _ ੷{+3&.1;c8ڳ\QɆK.B͙^W0+/kjFiP e;󲐾Kٺ iSId{[+6OGߥ_=zcwTy,Fqڞ{RfޔݾL ݸTP@]έ_vks7/$}zg{j̿]Ye4OmZ,ŋASC7 !Z=e~|ctqq\;nZw2laB߱5 >S2٧<[Y)jpei;R$T@&[{0/:6TFK~S!2N,fzJz8A٥cV"LWV.9GiLf/ɊBsD>Kp֌X:c ; 2LHΧAݻ3+\vf?)1؉K*)0t/>l71d*%& "$z즏w%2 8xc_/1ɱy0zuIfE¾P}~nwva1PfQ{n3*7=N?V$Z}Yhkk%?vF9GC)=(;ѹ;a˩3zA=dc$3IOިAtXHx/dRU&r佞O=CVup)z1#d}lQtKy)E)J25dݺ)׫^suFi?܍hy 3ﲉ>QU50~"zpAtaz#ϖG(P [(~HB2UH?4c6jO0:JRmNH"RYC<[5ОXiɎ9RPPhѢX*f͂xt7( Ԕ+)K5!ԖvՃt:m2?udIGٵj3U%J53nlijIڼ:DͳU NÚecjxMVq[9U,:2?9:z5U{nRݨyFqVԍlQ@ B͆ yiX#,iضs݌ 8uT.]ܭ[7#iJu޽f,z7BTj#FX[[_ ͮyv5k/:Hd2)SzV0ͣ{=WWGZo\.ɿdgϞoiټhO,;?S(ݻ'&&|믳Z%HW)}||ӝ>vhPY;|p)'Nx̙SN+qmݺ:/b$S.\|wߧO^XX8bĈB6nWW߽{%Ћ #ht:BjSN[lRXXuHVyy;Cʝ;w H${{{RmaTZZʜڵ Jϴi>BheTTTC+v%wwwRl.\h; R$Hm9;;b2-#Al233G|>ʕ+&mѣGݺu;qDD%&&vN?R ܺuׯ_H޽{m!4ɲ9rsJeSt/fIL!::B`&^!.++2e YK.}]kGí#͛WXqkOڵkɒ%u[n~8F;pMR'll?޽{7k׮ ho?nAlի ɲ 핅 ~WVVV_|Ŝ9syԩ%%%Z:Lddd̚5IsNyy9I3ݺuܹs3VV ;r]ve%c: 0aBoD Ynݚc[{sJ_>d4d5t.gǞʔVod-:5Yۃlq 9% W*%"Zj7. B4Q;vx7JKK;֭[7#2::zӦM:d>`C*sK``#JV@9G&GO,._P.=9V$q~wY:WyP?Q [6ԆF*$!n;˜=l]=jdV'8' v{@SڽP(ff91dF7n0)R'gpρ/ VdKEA)L/4V^YG˩>t%~qTHDe˫D{RFkPAb+-ٴLkSo 2 CQA>o\1&!bYI+AJ SL[* Ȧ4%MvIҔXZ`i4:.+).qnxDNÚK.y{{LO={\2%Ar$t05َe>RŤ᷀o3hŒȓ s< ɑ52~GHyLX''Sdi:rrr^}Ք777#z4?ϙ3oX9pV).l$޽{̘1rw=qℝ5W_}qFNGʕ+M{ϳ}irX<t@H,wҥKI$ye˖-v}X"..㑬9ydJvDxe 耐,٤P(ƍGrd׮]=vD-C(&''>>>lGX,Y}qWW3gΌ3ZҠARSS_zL///َ,qiB.\0bĈQsttH$fͺy󦯯޽{َfje>@dɂQFݾ}{'O޽eSΝb~ZQQAիY fje>d٦߿r#ݻ'**ױ}ժ'$޺{.<xi^Jo}Q[[ovرlGv&N$ ^~mu322lsJ"_؎M\reYYY?rs=vD,qɚ)))z:|Wl$88ٹKd$7 ) ~v9|w!еkWǏ_'@G&#vtmҨ*..f;6j??z|o.K,Fœ&L< #a\.HUٝ:upLeꫯȑhܹlc3.?}~)~JFՒ#vΝl`r,[ѽ{>rz'>s1-}].]HL2ͶhfΜI{ݻͶkm֩S'R9K,tl`B,[R xx1EG޽I ׮]k-޼y^"[ٳ3g`f'!!l9zR0Hʕ+ "G}fffdZu[g>}ȶڅ  @*ҥKl`,[^rr#9 64eԕM6TZi+f:N0ARVڍ۷o겷H$l>$&;wL2Fa;pP uֵ7n!!!kK,--wv8,Y޺uKնw3fP1k,Yڛѣ"-Zyd/]| ca>l/ݻwŊ6m4uԖM6F ,z!CHe޹s"kĉ$)##c֬Y̵@BJڵ+/0aBd> <ryyZ&;mX#{E; 1ہԣG6իW.\hѢ69ra^n7,@F Yd `%H]IaaFv,Cd8䡓'M0%흝GjE]AUGd4ijXں #Cy%,N[GLǁJ^;zt5_7222꿔Nﵜet:MTyYY.]ȧg>lAmO )T{z>ղ9չ~.󙺉ﳑ:ճհ,՚چϰ>՘=?ɶj0ɪ=9ͥ8Q<wQgI<ݸ%yݝsS8=wqjJ:k} EuPk!n<c<<^߃FY?J^z}fԽq_W~u4'"S<劲 uV]QDe6$]*(++ ]'-s j6v\SNq'*+TZ-S+y{… ^^^W/^`+5,r%se̝YEQBa|T< a3$Y,~7*[%} 3RwNK s=-:|WT>6y\IRRNIE+_`ͧDԢQ~}sŁ Ȑ-.'Q냷X˷<`waت 2R%'#r IDATöSϺ/;o{g%nLܸԍKi ,8o8v=E_olG ׼YLlW#budڶvGZDG[RJ("jty6]gdje*y&Hdj"&+ e:Llz8>%9"@$Go̰ϳ݄L)O㳧J鰿ԥ<̋VFJ$8GӋ?R0STYHBCb h)S/|֦Su r ߾}{c%؀eCUeK(n 3l)** 0H*豈ɉ>=>ouO'$Qr Sj)}Eӥ֊?6cɲe:GȮ8_瘏he௜pb(}6Eς[ה2?iי,N񨪮gUUZ *{O[8w`2R4HBH'p9 X/X5|t)ojCo؇QhIuLYq8ۭǀ.W髋?]MQ uREgÔ%Ӣyw2/A;dwy0l-nˉNiCg̚,`̤vi)E9& /vC? SU;'Mh6,D ^oL<|?(^P-?㡉OQ(Zjv](|1}8ao-HOZ2#v ʮC2i߲SԪOw\vP˾Izm{h Q5N)(麨BUqrdZ7;Rk[EUkE[qx IA1Yb f_~= `f/;s͒'UVsje_k@(E>:0_v46O2?"+J4_ǣڳ)-5ϼԴٱQ׳d`Ǝ٫;ܰkj;;qg71-*Ё z虬/pVб.SJ;Vw2FzOqivx&ó<ڔu˥w 쪿T .ɒv/^ CFkms)F3%BcFx N#'ɍi jT??ǮPex-8EH%R?ӿՂ3̘K稨JV<SQa|NXonw1_ذ28xedtz>)=w<ia=Ť.,]I WCb\\ƭJM| dHI 3&NؓUsZfԈ.M )]s'Θe(X'lepJ2ddXppp$Oa2 l/=wEv><~&ۓF~/L!:8~Fҽ]Zo?>6f͟?ORz8_`R`M[]:wVG440^OH))$\^Hz$WsIQHtMV䢠"~tP$IɌLth27%nx|ΔRe)MeLg׿{]A/H,MOPAI'3C7Ple6I'{$_\QrfClY,ݛDxO:ZGRB:EIfbs;QsQRme]D׻^[ OWDDVN'IzL:i 'yԕ,  0'-GaƵ֟ε4b$ŮNUR']rNɡi6xu%`GɊ:h۸ʭˁ["fQϊM}IZ3Nvp Թ<;oU?׹{jE&Do{giC㡿ʒ=(jL&a٫n p{; OO}!85%HI]uLB^uzge$YJߊbnwR7-d :eI7cOgܤ _<ͶY-0e7x`pe[{ZPTƎ +j=7;|}PR Iȡ7=([xnDǏ}6c9K. a:JWwxVAo$ߤك)9O4v6/?;arEk~ݪqg:׫ƃQ+V9asaGOP[`Y3x i4n,&n]LNCf\cK>ЛS-&+ٳ[/첵O=},@cuչ袳'/Ŧ񲻕Ձ3`8e1mgiO*5$3;޳#~{ob-#p4A9#/Ϊ0b-,>ؿ[Գ)*1>Rߚ9̯uⴡ⢾󂱷kQzϪG!1,!=ۚ<~xp[#`Ν˳ݺUI?od_fi6ɯ6l8LQRT} Zvzb7hYt'ZD~HwC(BucFty+W;E` ^JJ80GCi5r\WYUpCzڢ ȏ,G=o2GjiPx5܋/np/ *|̯AK{wU}'x nR5XhS܂]n+:[=ǰڳ{DӲƺm ۪'q;A[`;X v{f6hh EPjI/67={7 ě{7O{dor/sl~ǃMz蓞 glUv=%5$72ꊪtRizw.3;WM/?'M׎~0fٳ ePRZ^~pdp/,igك9+O^U:|&w?K)Co$Jꃹ~߲w3Ikitl7R{^x5jv'c=wFOv]jv;F6:;c>x2l{ڶ'8lCz7?g~ tvM~_[g-Ʌ޳sKߌ-޹7‹lɓM;H=1_}|[-aZz ixQIRkZZ.[`ҤN=/?mSgVU%K\|cZ~;_Օ鏥gl}l;=y~c-wnhYs'F3,J?_38q tL1h]U~U]C}ՆYo{k϶bn__lUSSa+bP&?NR/Ε"j/pݺcҎH_wGdd׭i].Χ'E ?*ӓf:" ]8ck؉Q5keV7tƩ=Nal1ϲ0aT5r U- ԶgnoΏ 88釽镐+,uH_޾c][(E[9z9*+;ӻVw@}I*z0mgc:&I[ VvE?H, {2w̎oe<=c@&I*.Y,iYon^?Kgno]hd]s3= ;tE[>ޒW-vE]oU;u۳wjnxt=WM[u{$Iko7׿/\^Mڛf}aEwR^k>ܖɓϹ/]:oucŋl: w^[ϿliGRukm]~sKiŌ7rٽ[oW'/֟]DzUIY֎+񺕜rܱ*?=`7/׫nmnY*z^eKISq?Sθ}ٮGoY_K7on9zoħz[oXۃMf;7 a8q~=cgp: n(vtޠlj˷ѣǯZս~uQ; C iЖɶo6vg57Vve;erJKYeKvOvM6nuv_&kޜ>0asmk[]~Wi ^g_6k{#t8Ӫkɧ'QѯO񻰾())V85=3nY.S'ϰշ?*=/h&ⱷ.=d=u<T=c\vgKRYzO~Wid԰/{?ݝȭ0Xr5*9/8+~555̯l:ǹɤɧ<_>fܱ#~ڛ_ؗ작̽>cDZο,XM/yIJѲ$M-=c챹[/ﲵ6[³"cΰX)%75<v+k s Qԫ|xyɁCޥ|.ٝصE6?4FKjܳ2;z_9hT7}tROtK uoMӺ͏>7]p%2s/r[{ 7=}m_N9%5xLCe^IfOOvO536Wz|66}Ҥ=?qވ+ꛋY lrAWIQ-Ʊ;VN*kj*+ۆF=xQ<0OcAbt) r^US[S]YYؙ=In_|K`_:y}n:+yˁm:>m:Wkc~W֯=°U -m]Wvt3O.nv.n_\?ڡiug:jauO?k,6lʂ֮l5CùW|w-QGQ\Q_W1COmc]}N]RU3xRُ ,rL;1pGOݝ$^| }0xoubY|ΏE8štښI?3zF^x,|v]ܟ 鏠pyL&<ՍL[Ꮐ=[vfӔĒ۰'}F0abQċ.'iӦU*)=wrJJ˧L)7rT#O8qf.t~ $ϫH7Z;˷LOt~ELNDž-=mJ#0}yu-7d-O1ӫ?3+fJcpێqPdol;jL/yow皙Z\[{n7x7gYta+slOW|e?PwOSϺ4XU:uoګkw^4xn޼3b†2cS&v; [ԭ\t@$Y`Nٔgf,M?釩tCݼg fyǷ=wwItKfF|;)=SK.g{|_|.;ɤg뮻֣_vڤin,ܵ~ٴ$k.=_~wQD8Yi_|q_~km߾ .W^y%T^)9~y8J{˗{wY z闻~$~N;~ʿ?u.|dݞΏ.zԞW_b$}g***/_^[cy )ϼ/6t'?;N*NX@@, K% .f;w<[qݻ7q1p2(?fڲe˭z7p¢:xwx={|EН6nzᗽə_we*fQ:;M9upvJm=KN?v6>:9,]paߚ2쬚lI'_3+9Ӌh״YVl}`M'N /2Ofpw9[SL_ZnZg\~_x);=_>assOEҹ쒲I?/sʫg}g3iۖ[msi䵴w}o+_)IؓsEMEXДuIRړBks35ݽn}CKo-LnJԸ{*ĭukohێQeϒcXБCo̸O'澗s5 uँ6I:O'6.,K2徳䣋n_iKodhqZܴ6Ih§mgLܛ~~P0H,9&2۶ X2j^y l{sWvJ; g_\~nn&\iҤ|]ǖί6awN5R^O' _~yCBw~5sßzh~$#=>dm8(Lo]+|3.{S~˲ݫk\6kцɤk5}W?_t;}X |?KX;[k?0p8qJ"Ȯ/Ԝ4$)lRԋ{cU_Yyp7rNW:{PX7br-bl939{:UTU55Օ5}=k٪kkkj_-Қֱ~eWzlZU֭qSuz[ȪڦC;r^V]X[B͚tu m_Q_3.dʎlWk:==Kvkͩy{E-sy<_C`lr.=E&L({Rtz޲ISz2يUrKJK eSzU(--ݻ+_2}C-g`woo@IԊG3-`2b NN/-8GOOK.JX^1<\NIap:0n8f XRXO2ĒNq}:0.%bGy?KӁJ,9\gi:0ݻs' (0.%;xDoIlϞ=7| 36,X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, EbC IENDB`,eDdd/=X  c 49Anew ftpbddYɜe^o\dm nTddYɜe^oPNG  IHDRdlgAMABO pHYs  "tEXtSoftwareQuickTime 7.3 (Mac OS X)#mtIME .[j IDATx \c-肮 >]XV)RIoP7k x-/)TEKo 4K\sIP]53; 򾈰 `9s9̞V]]Myq]s` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%F X` `%@KJJ. 3K*,X0lذ+V dt&6l7xܺu+B&@g` Ο??޼nݺ9r$??ɒ%I7O2X0\F_vիW?Ø;w~;((â@!XZ0aBff3e%@oꩧ{kk!dX:K6ڰaCHHyg9p@2,%@[|WӧOѣǹsZ B&%BoYYYo>t6䀐 `Y,A￿aÆ !R XF#_#G4~ 2%}={Gڳgv!!X fk׮}G222}юXB&yBhcǎM6{)))cǎu!dK~ߺuf2JpLs` `ĵk݋{>k0-!>h<BhܹscccG?Ջ dpY7o4h1@0=K8q7ni!, JiTT_|ܹs.N2L2wwիW޼ ,ꩪzRSS'O|رzB&@Ag?`ccuqB&@G@O>yw222 uq!}!X,i믿7 p] ,ȍ7 VZe!2%tuZvĉgϞ}WO8aAB&@ XBW㏶\2%ti+Wׯ_FFưaø.I!d%t]~IzӧOO0p!5,dcǎy={|}}.2Z` ]Qyy1c.]uqB&@s,t^^^/_s]" %t9/޽{O?Իwoc2Beǎ˗/۷ozz31w,KBN>+tԩS?<űU3fLEEŮ].AȄ B1vX/-[}vc2kBOӽ+gΜyu,B&t5dTT_>}p]!Kvڵd#itB XBgw߽Kɓ''Nuq:3L,ӺtҘ1c˷o߾l2% dBg` ͛7ǎ+wuqL|,{kv)OOϤ$< LL, ܶmszzz߾}.N %t6{ݻO?uq :gN8?`| dBΣƍ\ :gy~ݳg#2 XBgN<ɓ&L8}%VAK` ruVu)o߾5k 4K}ů]F-.E=r|ѣ_s]<#ݺu`R`\AA믿>zh ,z>|َN{Ŋ#;;{Μ9nnnIw޽u=';hL2낀I`VJ$0 b222hR+W/]X'Ns] 0.C0K#,@Ω T[GIn̂֬)Mq j+(Qt4gh'ԩ.((kEZZUO\\b.(}1;syz{g"HcJ3)B+?Kk}Ҿv5rwOxi7899H;.rC'` M H[k]*7}~mRS}ń s?N'9kMqmיA^_H$V1K3hZu~j:l;vmYCJSٚH&I:([&LM*ZZLo&g%.̴vZM Wf0B$ɲ,TiBͭEm5#2ϐG3W|)h KDdrg u}xpnV1Z%w+C+ $#gjOqgd;X'xB#ЃdZ̦q)tC$} hvC +NGc;ݩI[[E]߲3WZ(7]]dLZ2ޕ0mz7IM/f&61lٱF,R}~:4gS>!x wgKxW+mnPNimؑPIlҽ cFqe\AtJ[7Մԧ-+}A++dUj*K ;mcbXQ}$}QfVl{1+ApBm,-hPn.)=rD2ԕ*]^A'u`qM QY"p}A^Jc OtyuVa$ȪK}ib}Zy]" &29(ǟbu'} bp}&ADAIl7Um{* bI[$dumYqxrAR}EtuQRMoO,r >ɱ颐(vtHn9uZMV'W#g3ٴRS!X0c_/eWtT Z(:FQ$6vRko47$j um:oxӶR&kH6Vh[jҶ(j+PP i:kM`xAU :>aqh&*AOz-LpK#,@0T}k XBR lZ` xUL2׭,E.^˯\(ڎF*!1BM+}ڽ)M;.}kMpGE 32żF'U^Z^-bbDdʘ7Nmw4xH`vД?}k7#tMYj kGB<Bb LƋ^m7ڇȑ!W\"S逦tw÷t(ܳ3-FǰFӰɘX-X]%cĴ[hJ,L5~D斍U!*l2-L=7zWIw꾧BܚuDSV6~k @GB3gϰ.~sފe?/njцQcxi5:H FogUhf;FVz;@0SBRxM;S鈦|R2_LJ`Z;ۘE4jBNȼ@Q,JZ7Bvl9Sd`zGw8^#.uLSz'I`B8dj "5/, ա~ĻJ :)LG TO:y"D¡)a vhJxAhڒ3}Fܹs|>ȑ666iM٢sxڵ.޼7<&LPMr̙\<䓻vJ\ĂݹsgժU\LNr޺uյO>4d{ץ,"Ѯi-Ztmz?;w.""_+,,二yg ̙3sΕ}kgIR\[[ݻw: ,TUU^^^4R999u#%%233.]ZYYIٳJ z`1.\@_vv@ XhQ O<9!CYeصkSO=E#{VVVˑzWiW^),,|޽k@` 殬lK,sΚ5kҜ[h222*44g|rG:%\7̟?ڵk :p xm$777d=Tv/'tnYh4*4-RR˖-w--tnY9 ۷[mm?uȐ!:~v:=,г[H9nܸ+B{ZXX8a„P<%?c޼yNz׭[wШu۶m h4<kNEbb… _>l0Ǝۡ=WTjccsٳgw2,pۋ/2e sHIjY|J+O@sг5kL&ӧݻMov޼y׮],_~o]^^~>>>icc5gKfaT*… ON#%|"%Odddr[o&%CfͺtR~;uTKԬSN͛7?x1i@L?ƏO#/cΑz饗h!'MT\\~z<Еg hΜ9}i\jUnݸ.TkEEEjz̘1trrDKXZx͛7qlFuoƾfǎ8V-X \RYYY;2ϟHI0b J5wܿo\ L =Kiiig.,,^{5K>{g LӅL0FJX#R~&O>.=KhOf駟|͛.Qعs;CV@` f߾}˗/W*#G!'D~_;Νu2,3gΛ7ORfddtHIO\֭[tN =KxPgϞ3gΕ+W ///KdRIII4X<S?zvZv͚5?<$''EJn2p<==׭[~:,={O.vڵj*:;;s]"h7{eo=qqqÇDf… ";;[ l߾}޼y\.qԩShw駟)k1"==;=?3 ׅv%܇3g̝;W._ll'%2SO> &p]"x YBTUUZˋF7x#'''NU4eʔ+Wc\=K0"**駟=++ ϣG|'?3Km` *--4iҲe˪֮]CO?DnZpeXhɓ'i'ڵk>p%xuڿX,DZYBCf寽JDv/x{{/š5k@Gs W[[ۨٳgs]NO?~~:..O?,6EDDH9~xڡD o6ϘKFgi:4ezݺu?… KHԆg"ر#6697n%jIj@4~! _ ͢{Z޽;,MusKsӐ鬭.HKV;7n̟?ҥ\Ă8q~B?<@g{F X` `%F XZ, /@1Iu&8}^d՟Upn{en8xt\Ƀ*lsS@\B/ڶ}vCΌ ^"q*eIB|JeY Fԝ-J!gg~rF~YWV4U3 : =q;ϥg!hZĎQB)N ]qA^9bG 4Tf̾|[j^"yJ .Z;諉C=¤DS7J&j22,T}3SGB5Q_IOQG[9]u!_^FxFs0`4)A[S臏Cc}2l ܪ:/Vm}tݑMlotdz=0e;߭s߸LZGeI+&_wdk>V}5Mt%i(]^8fH_Ie-kwnAb*2%qޞre)m>tD]~Ev v478mTI$&&ر}F1ƀx(AD?Ī_]@'DlrmQ< Ȫ IDATn454UjhfwGz%YJeF3E_¬WNfEt]Wj[RZy)9S(߉GD:fD٢ uuyr!oTLT[-j>R6(JZLYQ.ַo-F$ ^hSsÓZml$2I@Q::,- 4ZIoio,]Z9.Sg8 rBTXlxЭ]Tj^tGόY(nib <\{:W0 'f{38KTN'$Z1<Zm%:8 !e~]e"tVT' f{Ӷ:ԞW:MyX49A<\$tp(^mcܒ+yw rݽy֑.ӗ㹽]?%ҋ[vˑ!-ÕJ2}K=KWu *(d୴6ޮNBͤ}dr:wE]=i+hotq~q]YG3A"4f}|EFz0?ٰmW^fjuUlMxV=Noε]ͅr獊 BbȄc ]S: STx]2߆"KG:521O<2ML{`6u70d]1S?+oҙsC 48 M9 &,XLJ1]~2s}~Byy% S0'I=/C.:pWw}"$D,K||ńCPZili}˵E[no\]/Muil~( ]Kyxx2;#?և&(6 R:Q]$1d-I7A䞥V.oVxRV̾7pC*:{d1[3"T~VlPl|~ "mLR?mj榩6.:?]KTVyj ܓ CND:pUrer#o&MZ0Q.KM%gl2%P։4e}LQ 6P>%}ذZ.jmMeVqʄ&R2JZNW8l,pւ|A@(yv5ij#DsSwG ꛕg\q@PڮuY[W\/Wܪ3a]45UF{y 9-?DJR|u ])~㴲.< z'Q6nܚ;bWcc8Dеڨ*+֐AR4)\o.tߔ:~vle~z +x`g"6~Ɋu&GX8%)ucq<%[Za;9M;zIC0d~EV.+0vXoRB* 6e [B|ȯ{μuYW57JC[7(ihTZ#y]E{13 U "0Lb"%p>Q̀ľA4" JVfHH,2o32֌/Og~0g]7'%DepRyj3Fo{V;qDqqҥK UE>YF leEԌ_|xNӏ%gdךOT)Zkv R(ռmu:\+鯸2 ixMC9Tpp߼&=x7jSr,ѱ2Q@;B[ QK0r9P˰F X˰s֭l PUUu̙={5O>mT*ݻw۰ 5Rj'L`mmm|.: |uD źulll'4`=zT.w7߿?WiNxb''ZoAyyW_}E xͳmyK_$IqqH$ׯ_JJ /2E뺒) Ǐ}vVVܸ.4{=zxxH?9s&00rҤI۶mt]ԧ~E#?=wfΜYRR2a„Çs]:hm޼S?v={^UUUqX®FѓZ?֭[ G?m,euΝz{8Arrr߾}iOO7n]PEE{w~m[>3cƌ۷o$Ωtkoo\K.d.\0e Z#FBmgff:::dnnnrܔ% XvB999C G[HTXXrbs)Ӕ JII׏y]X,~zˉ^SOMSBhegs 'OV*YD-[71uhEZyo]gϞ_~eGZŵkOKфݻwmn:ўV]vݻwz뭍7־φa{nذaϞ=-֯_ei;~ǑD|Xj0C-;;{Μ9e8ڎjsmcܹs͛޽{>}Wm/+Vh 9l/Z>iF٣G6dB۔,m_>߻woUA{{' ww߮\Bmxn1CWj0O˶`iKd޶ee[رMo/h/L,@0O>nݚM5%ߞ"FOxB#tɭmu iu[k+rq[j k`'`*ʞ=o[nߵ$hZ++0~zY9SOOx^#W \O~O]E^j%?_F 0V}UMuXqlc%I+z-cՓ->{kl[3fmi1ZMYkZ}2"d}]U68iylrmOZ H$ʗ fWS 5sfm3IʓZIC)yZ&^}*n1RԊi+Z''}95tZ[ڢr5f14";Ъh>iu}:VK ʙgO^f=Ն=e֎>G\ckj50Mn`n_]ʥ N;wr_χ#Μ~]^Z=os5=N$Uת G_lkDž/99¿7\\v]~0՗ Yxv/ye&::Z?魪2ZZY{ IHOuuAyoc??w4\s™s:[ A>N.N1R>}FYI.#bJt:Կg Ӗ|ńoȍhn|d/3مlyg\{,f'Ql;QH0}o:-d.<\%qrq9Mtv}E Zz0:P`c©}iŇ#ѕ&$ :U%IVO1-%=p爬qSbj}ђڔZlj7}ޙ*ms\=]-Bӛ>.zuo` {5{ۏEzf)잚35D榪UK4Uscv'tFh}ܡ{hhA5΢ihF-pN^'|1.Md{6aT#@g`=4.Sdm֡~NL ӑ;-{ݬ\IiG:gXJ9cM^Q#W3d: b4pa_u_f<~Ī}= `?K'xǷq[7k95lDL<7+5 L,Jd&g>Xĥ6崭##U±)^5ٯУͱ/^5%+)R.,Ƭ6<^W.:K{,'p]._Q[8wӈ =/ԛ'4s#r*/Ұ1;?\`lƖ~K)קh\w%Hfr孼#SzxAoY clُqM7^yV[N8xoJ k<݉(ɨvױ|ZЉ!X^YdN Ѓ9X1ad$DsTNUpGۇ~*HԨo-j0zN:[mF3S/6}C659-ZB 6gl2/,i5ϫ3a7S;?(-TִnBz.?{Խ[VF{5=G%޸ Ѡu{4'/4:B91?;K"<2μ3?g~+ͼTп+ qU: 6c/eG؍[<lRsl@,ޔ:e%UwG5>@tӰFSoc3jӍ5$^x,ݴԐ^GSͲ$YfqA֠,m˳$LJek'>L+Jb%UזG[ \޻ k 69${]M>ڬd r <}ĉ'FT2} FP N{ 4 Rg#k0G  gm'lFZ2h?NҾW>W^,rJ)&?KC FPx5ݺym:]F FJ\ev?^F_ @L^B%V688YޏhLڋ/R> !Xޏhe%F X>(sodnjbnk;2F>Yb}M,@0߳l[negw͌JR'ګtD{!qȑ&QYYikktɓ W_۷o;?#--W^0`@w}/f-Waash(߿?-@ hrzEEEbb"޽{=O>OjQfyg}pB||Q|C8,ѣG{EK2m4*8, /@B(9s#wμwpw8ft~![{Vxb}v׮]\ XvwC}\Ǽ|={oܾ}dh4gϦѣǁL^}~Vu:0#ETJ$[Abb"1G?i=S xڵgyq? hqۖ^^^\\ Xv‘#G#srr.nnn333;t]ˠA׿u,څ iE\tfooO5ƍ]cn߾=c Z]և?~}uʔ)*iܸqӓVW߾}.,Ylll=Q歷h4\2!!!=͛7?3FPPݻw=NϏV՞={.ǺUw\~]՚`E|֬YÚ5k/_ѫ߿?=59hi+V3P0#< ͵V^M+j˖-ӧOow^zBꫯvj\_=z E+͛|^.ooo]Ξ3g{/вhRzvE;SLi&b՗=芃ݰ­1氭氨#'I17!6*)..))֞4ٙJ(L.((2΂FƤ_ٹ5F~(!۳/ʑI+nݺ벍+]?:V%<XY[Oi)4=([sǤ3US_mW$'0T`D:WLwhSo@2U IDATKW7iC^v^hH_cǮ u<0=ZZ>6mRN,")৮YHT4YhO .7EvrQgc(%dۢ 9hv9UeU?;[BU'ge&hʘ]Z(pʎmxŋC6/+b6}qr~V^ Z+KSBD\WQՋhKW.J+ R] DDeG(ue}@M 3d%/C쓶C'+ܸ^;M<>)]v^W ׄzhoz^A} 2+3DLq[פPfE0%mÔD9 __|#=lfxR2͒_]@G˔Lڐdy5۔7_)ih(AQb mi꽬DqDhUz \N@ؽ=56Tm1jdp"Ie[4"U$b+ev6i]2lS%:a=Uޛ^{\*-t2 $>$1Wݲԩ.ғkY%+ <7;.~g+W~¬ĬUx̴O_U󬈎پZsRȘ*1xf~ FPa?Pt5~ˆ)tk gCc՞=9_vf̖Kd%$eOݙ}М >Z46@VQ@FV+Oen0 s‰Ëu*'DzDEH“Wo*I7UmC: 1zLdGe5y2ulA,ܧrR7H]g\h+rZ޵5zuKK%#|e%DK:܂x뮄o=b6U| :xBaJâ(vmgޚtع 6w0te Vvر2 e̱ܦR*2 L3eFPT= )@GBdMg]?uCo-oe4ّ7摋+=?9[grϺ F@d<*!),. %y)wMJFBLrrAU޿>~7wxd8:c+Eſ2R FQ\\\06P[ ٿ5 N2ͽnVK=t@j^u)3K+ɥRtnu{}uaz9quڕ[:\'z\~/{iKίK!}{I]]>xy}7mt[*{+WkpG)3nԓ}mb/}}rVвqOn6+f3#>8-e,hgi-7W]ze}F2`8TU'ՉJO/}\E/ygYʨm`Y8zg覌p1ٶKz=;diM4ʓmCF2}Vz JF dĜ@XR*yOhɖ8B/GG&<>F?W{2#І=~R' ٛk⫔v/<όYds{[b431)1Y/J-ؐORW䮝=M ,W8gGC\RNFL1iɻDz1ֶHΓV<ЦrAFp7! XuGAkޛ qʎ5w @W2[}6[w]AM6\?M`f[xV-ǯOWOJΘa!K$ģX [9ß% S3qtZhgkmŌfkE ;̢Oؾ3=G>֕K!BRdBE NGNl:{:#L*=/0|/+K S7(C"O7B!XUECRN~n=j )Q3RZmUt×Xzѿ\Q4qc}3hMu1#1oY4qn(ׇpUdI!$e*mir55ϰ<;:]Hh^ъ%S蟷:6AwiN ~k> ,,Vs X{kyZד'Q9{Qoqn֭ۗBȑ^tg?_? xE␤t~OO;R~p*ȝϏbRa` 욚z J&B'eC7m:N4ΝY tD/Wc^Eœ]"&dG 5}K\%JS)[qHؤۭz`uAkǫ:gvf_yE]U': ͂]eVW0=I}.VׄZG=s'gSu&CJjz]03\Ʃ 6N? ]z}+n3*N\dI7+c+"n"U"jL s ܝ)s?j B4RdR ˅;d@(;b/844hN1>a+ 5hW4ܥ2~Шϱ TYLu,sK/I5K2%$x!UX||\WS! f{u}pD΀wJԑMΰ]v*kX]+Γس8=jSb+bYĴrGk!MU2&߸~|y|;'>|>OO58oz K>!ٺ6/Әl>糛iǴ4ÿMI+܏'rr4)8ڱ̾+VNX9贳+ϸi-ҥ3t{=ⰿ ^z(/OO$V;ՓWV${ƔPt?rxGEޯ .Y^*\̬\:Ԅ8gfmҗEr#ѫ/I~s͓?mWm]9Y/&+ofUԧǠ;][}Ū/iᆞ\ø7m˧L% =w-|Eoض V^є|hkk;S:>|뭷{rT?z_L9SM.1cl§'-m2t#ɟ'//M_L>PV5C#f+kprEw \-/M{/?~|ss,5yŞYV{O^d{3߸aâcTrۆ$(pGUd{W_X5-w -vrt9#Ů+pGVa5ܲcxM`nKh9\ʑ%HfOxhI6I"ũr/ ^9 X@@, K%b X.͖ʿ#\]]]ovyguJ߿СC|w^xayyygݘek7tSuuu'r劸wٳgKoVOO9icU;w-RhWGǏonn.,N۷?+W3f? wn fv1:N, R3f%<X3z;E?j{@>ť7>ߞ=oN6񝏹SVm?ڰڴܰ+i+$پ;3ɦfپ7&ٱN&?װ3ܲő?:;8$:sDzџ+i,^u賾ၾ'Sް9i_q&=?7=ߖsz̤ٳܸ&ٵ?ٺ;i<7AN۶m; {<ٗ7է;zƳ/oL]F1~z){d+o\lux˃G\pCziE}]GM;ztnƏ-EȲ Z懫媳vUCe_/s_>~2n_~|ΖCCoJ9^iG_Ŭo6_W }eܵ`W&G/y;7y;&}Ζnx`S)y_@щ%'EoǞÜM9fYU#o?dy̍,ísn\~ܼh1WOHߝmX9~˜2vx/oäkX3m֑k~Mc׽r?(0*%'S&}O ]HlY?y~.w{3Ѳk6^d'%U3>MsMw3#oѤy~ysG%H^5'yܺjU:J^XwǪGYh6w[svn̍onRnYw}}iH}GvnԜɳf7aMme˾P4ocu@"H* Oٺ;"vp ִ//}M /^o6& wE+66?ָxꥹ=4=5HOgyҦ,}}-P}dղqh:M[Z?z<2N~ط:d{*kjNLYEETL/) TTu͔Ny]uw3yg26^] Μ_̩~_IKfҤ\)sVV)+lu"Ee)8a8Ptb X3uO8PbYjδmO8Pb X3;Aoܼ`bOSk˖-sO'|V]v9c{"Boֵ^[Y, %b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, KIDAT%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@@, K%b X@HI^IENDB`PbDdd/=X   c 4A new btpba~Z(>ࢣri]am nxa~Z(>ࢣri]PNG  IHDRdlgAMABO pHYs  "tEXtSoftwareQuickTime 7.3 (Mac OS X)#mtIME 7ui IDATx\S:tS_{r^@SQj҉z0R`.Zz?)TEK omXP(*(#A;9;?D*<9yy{9{j{X:K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,L@0K,Guuu~~'|R\\wY!X0D2/[ ! XC[v._{5s˖-~;wnܹvvvqqq_x1B&-.S*gxxڵkk_zgllleeP(|7cQ,NՎ;6##cڴiiALۀ` v|d֭[JcYdzL` ԩSvzzz~CLk` p233o߾}om! Xܛv%{oݺuB&@:N*꫇nk dX>K{0sxxxt֭sFdEի~Gy#v `,ZرcJ.]GաB4cƌug̘aok׮yyy ` ,ZBC?{ȑvy 2` В9s >޽;A %@6n⒑ѿc `~M;~7|3zhB&9!X4APh>9s]f!d%@C^^^/_^rƍ.i >%%eҤIǎ{.Qk!dtKzϟ' 6wtt8 !# Xܵy~9==}|2%щ'&M$N>3]v ^,Xѣ+**hh?>iOܸq˫`Ŋ6m8!~ XBgǏ̙^zVk d %tv111=?wq!^!XB|^z<B&@!XB_O88uرc.?2Z:QFݼys|g-CΨlȑ/^ 8!90 3a\ /|> %,!XBoڵٳ=űPu!XB}zgϞiiiC 8!` ȩS^|E;;'O>s|j d XBgoȑ;w 8!:3KT*ըQh\tm.CȄ l0/ӧǍW_ Kd2AG{zwqlB&t`vܹxb#i L ,}7/}qĉ][ lŋGYVVm۶K]N!l%ئ7o5*777 `Ν|sAۃ` 6Ν;/ɓ'}||+/2 X ںu!Czwq:5L `kٳhѢzٳ|X`,9sfǗ_~= !%؎//7nDEE]hB&X#KO?{n& duA[L4ĉcǎ=uꔽ=%VAk` ru^w)wUVߟK}wޖů]F?[]zJm3'FwϺzlO~ }fl{4.]NHKtRPg.89 _ݴ6?QpK{'B*x ڴ% #xӨK}Kosl)mP߅LW6^T.e3I\8}rb%2uc< 5'_~p!Z쳗+AAnWxD!yi -ң Bq[ZCIS׼AuM82֯R\PGFᬯ*:UvvR!oy^W+؞48!h(}[Kˎ%1@6I:%TB(H[XO~qřl& %4`^A*/TWWEЍ,]-Qgve[IiZml:l۷m[c)RLQ$:,Y[&%)lMFzZlo3n"g[;R[[JhF!2yn&t]h˭ k5;G(Ias_a矯7-fYf:녞%B+%S 0 ΛiK_hnh5NdyX@+rzs;ꝹtDS>!'%dxL ' P}!z["3Du(E+ $P̍=lsn3Ȳ/v"X43&,"507K}C'ַJOHi~ԔfX'J>}lД`+% hJx|V>-۷~+ wqVUUEw)X$۔VV`5-|,477 .^4͛gΜqƃ>0vX )Ow)O" uְaz葒BCfhhK_]:g Vv%_y啅 ޾}~H@vg}|lz`}N>=gRٯ_{vBqrrڵk믿c9fg ֤wޙ0ajvvvHII$%KTTTШ9sL@iD .l!'͛WRR2p=lۃ%X;w>4Rzyyeff)^z;_|˗/?w1OQ X+--4iŋ+++WZ:dȐlاOڿ {g.]ѥ˰`Ѿy]v S?ۆ%X(NK/HIC]vvv"%5lذKVTT0yflz`~d۶mgnlk1cƴK`гB?mٲӓFѣGgeeW^|EC˗/;6,, O@kg ;wɓ'|5kּ{4j֭[u:O?}Au^f XHLL\`LبQ:twP(w1sX5\ݾ}7ߜç~Fʱcfgg2_W_~P*2 cb%Co͙3o y?m۶mʕ:nԨQc4،1ݳ_q8V-X \RQQQ;2ΝHI0l2F3gΜo| =K3gμ|/]vP}=|=Khg Ä;FJnJ,ۈ機I&qO{x@SAA3Ξ=+ 7nw:Ď;~mV~l%{[jz4<|~~~?H$ھ}9s.t \vP^^>}sj4tێOZZoݺE>aY:s̬Y\ҷoO?t„ |Ȭh,..~Gߏ~lzvz~ժU=2,;;EJ2=pz|||֬Y~lzF~nݺm޼9 lΝ+V9p!C.Kh={pxC]"py"++K$m۶mܹ|.½qƔ)S-ZDPٳg)k=iiiLjyM6MR](hY=8}9sJ]" u)ZQS?;v,%%JUUՊ+&L@#kHق*cKm` *))8qҥKV^Cٳgi֭[ ,:u*: M;qD^vmDVQJ|Z =KhHӽ[/2ܭJDv1nܸl__~_jYB=lN/=sLKd>裿o~ꩧCǦH///)njC;79ww,͇!K_Y\hт KD҆Yf"m߾=..9=z4%jIjf X8n8 ,Nj]t|iu+Ky2qpp -i[ =-ڞ7n̛7oɒ%|Ċ?~^B߿<-=K,L@0K,)+((PL)e2(n&5SqرSECJkeCe`s`!XZ-^#E'4 &gה^LQ׊S&xؔYUC9]tKaS>6Cհðڰ&>-9:=z<6X{˜^o9$W,"_jĠeׯ;~9CT z) 5op9snGIO >̦;zL]l|c1Uzz!qܞ׊suS:M3mٕ Q~+d{MМj0۷oh.<*|zί.;Jj4eBY(MI  IDATJ*"E_?}Ḭ\׫scط4ZK!TC%Pvj9,R[kU+#lM)PG N$~~Z 0=ktp 6 }untunHy}H%)쒵eRCbD5>Ű6B^ L/e۝7*C!A }lUOB5m%*E#k \aSIQ 'aw *lvX<;\$c._#D$Dž6Xߍ7e_m(O ?jёGEǻ8$I'{(R"F:{B{{]tj{0o{vc{%ҡq!륫_/f mg\=S H /p@=>[{n\W[YZOTq$ׄl1u2:44J.ϻ+hoLwwsU+A,LNbEF?9;r1 dvi*u7QzSs}Q^NWڗ2w%D}甩Zj)hRmoChjFKdObMijTtE@#*h/@(&ے-ʝg+tEyY {N7\ntuuҒik䐇Dm=uNrHCί>c ]6PJhuDuv~gMe^jwSuna52ZFl *.9\Dw̢wصo~Cyy Sб _c-u΢#dFʈT*K 7`cŔ # ܤq^^꒸@*I`zIHn9"?Ώ^\)Bt0IfZ&W6~垥^!1VDR^)f4mpjEο&eR.jFb\oڊ K0AQ5ܿ4Zi*%)% ?%:qJ^5[CIچC`i&qk 'TmYIruYY7Zf/l(M+ #ҍY.XE+EuI벾GfzǤU>.lXj-Mõ:38POMeT[qZu!X2 bgqX,6FkE@H/s˵7+b@TڹuY[(W_//ߪa]455=&LxO k9&R27K Eutv4,pzlJebsj^u#bg}e~uakHGKe$oy}{Mɨr \fWyǿrF*c/SgpĴ#x+]3?Tl:@16?QpK!wqB~ӂ1}댽n0EG r-s*lqb5=JO婨9){ ߳4ZmR*/د*8yN ol޳f‹/RB.jj"P@Ht7_7$K(Ǝ\J撎z& k^9Su0Fi?wpKlu +d5y}h>{`K!# K1%~~RC])%RTnJ.#juHR?;q6f$}*58C%uY?(jý9-,::DUĎH v񢢢%KGɎ 2!:"uR5qTcB]07btaW7Ct]k6PR1HSk?$i5W\LٕKW|t&vSaVÄ́5'\^@o|&G Buލ(%(& ='kb" hGy?|ݭڷ#уǒ󣹲N6[Vzرc6}zqqرc:wGq`?wmoNzhѢ*K0 C?КlRwUXX}Qw6rܵk׸ ryϞ=i7nPyy9w'J1iӦݾ}%&!Xڦ1csKjjjs.^N 2,a'DkGBmgdddJҜ% XڠҳD"|rˉi_g„ 4q=N$ܯ<% XښǏs_?4iZn& ,]:BLL wx…C|^{nҭ[>K-WGڵkߥh®]6 Xf hO+ŭ^Ν;g^~}׻wo.ۋwݺuwmvE~[ڎ~aTT1<=dڽ,=ʚ5k}cEEVhX07ޤ.]bm{)((]lY{ec{њIk6 Ϯ]!ڦei ‡zf^ ݳ+W~& _~e;fP^ `05w ۶̳!Xۛ\ `,o2r` `% x~5s>I}'(mkP紡Eް^'ީ岵̽\ѭm;rְܵ*3"NՐݙj=??pp>ѰF􂮤Ҿ6ɷɷɰ>ض9ڵkc<҂Ze]"ٯ?s5xM_]-җ dW%I~n5*:wOO-.b4yu#=CrBa6=AUp#nnr;띆iic#.WpO!@uu={VkK Ԇ6hO^=Ն=Q~ʇ{C״)cϛnS4|}3zZ^8]7W SӮ+ *-;V aPqu4RLr7upt]F񂛛40OL|~umi{_y?+ιs@b]U1Pbb֪zo+塵'iiNϫ'~{=~xPc*W ~nn !}!>=sќw֠ Ƙ!9aQ}׼#QoTz6~0ɉl{1!-kv[ã5MzӜܰ{UU, W3~` b4P"HXuOvaª=} d?N#h~7 qα}-{{^C}&_hD u0]wǢZNk_Jݲh$MH?ԈlrwM5Fл͵'8nɣp leKq Gh]W;.:[{,>'@[gu>]ˈ]eGeP\\o,_S[FTsT7_gޡ/;bwlv׸\`-˽ZaO9z"[y}O-\^x]Sm-?^~SnnkI_ )RzD6u<uq20K+ ڡv [' Q6讞̮;vwp۳QEe贷6u1+d{6oǾ~ M7 OfO hoyc%fk2-Wn WgK+^3\NwL;YMDeuMK9DL? >^ϭ[ r+=Țꘐ#vi\ꆍhԺw4ȗ|v zZJOr9c&~|3o2Yjyd\ׅ3'k^CɸV$ӿ+ qU Sae}Ǽal|(ϸ]^5}M!wvZM$f]Slԕ)q+]v,BHWMV4q4+͏akiܲhΑɄEG*t0TJCd_^FrVv bs:REY.ue΂[+.D"FΚ_R[.7T&# RRO^Bư+r)u8bf\(Hd2ZYm~Y<\Rs\:@ln% uʞOduz{ЧaMǥ.+1khzv^a1?ڧsgY25{,ˌr +KU;c[QV'3캶<£IU 8X`;G{&}fBDm2 2a>{v񢢢IcBFUq4*ōSԌعnQYčVe5~}qS>W^4jrFC_bm0@ ~.h]w?ڽ,.{P$v%VDJCb1MHn b7hk$M=x {E4yϢ 44HIثڟ9ZxIWDBȗ}ꉽ#>qX,#gy{ĔH(z@mͳ̳!X` `F־|ȑM.o/v־ B X/Kodyi9泄N|ϲ-nݺe+Å[Fj7OW@eeMQQQrĉ*^ٳgmrZRR/ӧq;w꫍m~- {D-&'&&Jx衇;GOjQfy}3;3KvyUVV]{?_\}]^ `izoI ܹXtΝwyx?X>[nr^{۷om:n̙t]vݿkmy뭷8jQ$%&&]K?׏VѓO>oa׮]{?aV'))m9a„r`),;˗N8 8KTzzzҊruu}_RXXءjϟ2d(ww/]`RSS]\\fѴ+wq,۷MFСC/{ub3nܸCgϞruڕefϞ.u?BCC =7>;F;=Th"ܾ8<\~]כaG33UV[޽{YhF.@JLL\lƝ{ᇛV޿ʕ+iEmڴiԩYb෕C?нļKZ-2_l?Xf̛7o :z_|}}iti*++k֬Yܽ@BFy衇`htɍWʴQ˻w}ǺXB+WVVjZ( `-2ld1ig_~e\d3?~UheB+` `% & XB UqJ] !XVAc9+nh2{ݕJ(T%Ⅾ8ԱcRt5)+(((mM4pTEv~SWT)y X GꌨTY d򸘝!JKtUbOu-P*9֤dt#e j3.o?+ ׹*aB]V2{Ffw77[~!XN|\'&ҢR4/+Hca^ˏ\ZTZNWt҂bs2R(p*Xzn]B SWrNE|fNʍz3;GTm;trK䕠 +?N]dCceݴY;iC M{ۑ H]׎¦Ñ2.x`M4N*TYi4KgGш])I<*pHj" a;X:uo"~8<ĕS@JS*&.4şݾ҈!#hq?e21sib}3 `{pϲO]S aϊl ԥ*6tzhb gmVIB B{ckA_#:OcǔQL+(!Cnj'a_ac*ڴ3է 1y3-”M"!ɉ9lE\H4tȸ$$uuѵD67?wM?:!UXS>Ξ~` Z۰Fk_H>`ɶL4|5>bEձ4ЕS,ܱ45*X=;9)L;Ў)d7(ѹ<붧Tyb5u*ֱ'YVTp^a]4LGXW"p}Bɫ*%9@̭5t r*$ƹtľ+p\T2 _ͦYBGsܳ0mg?}HHK4&Kb/Ir}^lSRoK' N( ds")JmϘZ(UIt,P03\{)kˆXv̝II/=e.IyJF $pyeQ>>da!Fy ')&aԔtHX?!{+|/텵lũ. SsJdK?|Iuh[ F2\ĥ;;!Ϟ'{ê&I>͑9:qr7C#گUQgr񸄈ȭ7! X38}ʱnᱪ:"p` DL#L+rѳ!eDkFLd˚[ d̗tEB`‡cI$ywEL%; ѫ+uF` k\{9ۖ.DT[a)>(!һ#c ͣgD3?~|[7,  1yt9d>Çˢ˘ɶٳtBѦ>ѱ(TɸB>U',/(($(þ*+ѢSRղҔǰ>U(7'%0[߰a݊]L8+0ϙG¸3?39ՏÆ+5ڵn3{V1RbNQ?ɧHܕ \tN)3<|UV;2~zK"grߘ,M _k]gya6/}jxWgoܺI(@.8|7ȇj?q-{i A> =$_|J|G|8}K?88eBihWa$ X74o&&Eˮ3>vP2z{ku_{ Cہs=K ձűvMol|Iڿ6uϵu/\m]]f9Aqv\d&}}Kq-@iwE8 /@0),:TY|~u]:Re(={u]'=wѥ^#tuu)no>" $e( ?9f X@ %b X@ %b X@ %b X@ 믿;ܳN,';wp g.D7wnɮꫯ|͋-! /OxM sr";ϭq@,' `( ,ζpOm( grڷsKSGkUTqћo|s3?ΟQ;gGf45xxGGOoe=qW{l̚Y7^?)\9L<31~?Ns&+{ﹺK f7V|a7*Qmg~~2~Ǫ+md] =b;NG}oTܿ큅5Ӧڝs_[UsC퍍w{XL^CL8k׮~oWݣc˛ZJtvv,>ܰ;>¸݁qڴʱÂJPۏKw(;V9u3gϨ=}{m3m+ ܱK5NX7j W,\RZ־h%S*U5wn?S_sh팋Ggsmm}mqw!6uő=++5p/t<2M>{P9c@w W5^ok?mp7zܹKᭃu܀IN,'3{̾tӾȉ/7nEŬBKaw޷TVޙͷ;*_߱jᓇ.]7pd8eWˁBzn:|u/ڴP ᦹubˆ{/y=R_\ڇltVmjY:7u苮EkqQSSի45/^p`suKqyեSZo8at-K64BZ oy tw.ދ-ZO2:{z:9g9mٲ-*Ds==}5uܞ9|xt*`euuPOu]Cz S_D׊+=|d.cem]}ϱxÑ+val~ mf07cى?ƁK,ζ2?q,r8ێ?q,@,'xS/AO@[ly嗯rOȑ#[n=rYlٔ)Syk.+D`K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K/>mIDAT@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, K@, KfY MOqIENDB`H@H Normal CJOJQJ_HaJmH sH tH DA@D Default Paragraph FontRi@R  Table Normal4 l4a (k(No List nn + Table Grid7:V0_HvOv OPME References($!dx7$8$^!`a$CJOJQJaJmH sH 4@4 w Header  !.)@!. w Page Number0U@10 oE Hyperlink>*B*4 B4 oEFooter  !MNMUVfJ RoqsZL4!""""""""""""""" #####*#+#p#q#9$:$u$&>'?' ) ),,,b,c,I/40506070R1S1)4*4,4x4y4777777777777778#8$8f8g89>@aD{GALkPlPnPPPRsTWEZ\]]]]]g`bb0c~efffffffffff:g;gzg{ggggg$h%hilnoo#ppFqq?r@r?tvw&}'})}l}m}݋V;!TȚСѡABҤOhiTUx{Mef]y636#$>vwU D{ 7fS0123<=>IJKN000000p0p00000P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P0P0P0P0P0P0P 0P 0P 0P 0P 0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P 0P 0P 0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P 0P 0P 0P 0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P 0P 0P 0P 0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0P0@0@0@0@0@0 @00T>vwU D{N 000000000000000o߿@Е0@08Е0@08Е0@08Е0@08Е0@08Е0@08Е0@08Е0@08R  8,7$@hom4H>"**+*+>/<???#@lXnnzoow]1MLfMX !!8@0(  B S  ?M FO;0E077TTod|dU^dit{  3KN}&,*,)}/}UJKSZ{j f34mPx3KN3333333333333333333333333f"+#7$8ffoo|'}b4BGUwAUDY"S23KNTf23>HN Paul Ernest2 Iz)`'4)AOe|U \vh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHAO2Iz'4|U                                              g*(vt4!""""""""""""""" #####*#+# )777777777777778#8$8ffffffffff:g;gzg{ggggg13KN@ M@UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial7&  Verdana?5 z Courier New;Wingdings Ah {fyW%W%#24d K#q? .Mathematics Education s Unfinished Probability Rina Zazkis Paul Ernest      Oh+'0@3 ,8 T ` l x/Mathematics Educations Unfinished Probability1ath Rina Zazkisina Normal.dot Paul Ernest5ulMicrosoft Word 10.0@ @%-P(@b+@ݵ.W%G1VT$mW    . "System  r0=  -@"Arial- G2 h( THE STATE OF PROBABILITY MEASUREMENT IN (0--).(-4)-041.0)(,8.--00-8-0(0M2 }, MATHEMATICS EDUCATION: A FIRST APPROXIMATION:-)0,:.(0--001.(40.)0-(---04-:-(40 2 y &@Times New Roman- 2  -"2 ; Egan J Chernoff-)%(%0)%() 2 ; %@"Arial-2   egan_chernoff%%%%%"%%%%2 E (at)%2  sfu.ca!%"%- 2 [ $@Times New Roman- 2   2  -2 9s ABSTRACT$"!$$$! 2 9 @Times New Roman-2 rwS In this article the three dominant philosophical interpretations of probability in i!!!!!$!!!!!  2 w m$2 [ athematics education (classical, frequentist, and subjective) are critiqued. Probabilistic o$       v2 wG explorations of the debate over whether classical probability is belief  2  -%2   type or frequencyt 2 m -|2 wK type probability will bring forth the notion that common ranges, rather that $$ 2   n common $$2 XwO points, of philosophical reference are inherent to probability measurement. In  ''''''''$$ ' 2 w^ recognition of this point, refinement of subjective probability, into the dual classification  $  z2 wJ of intrasubjective and intersubjective, and frequentist probability into t&&& &&&&&2  he dual & 2 wZ classification of artefactual and formal objective, attempts to address the nomenclatural $ $$2 >wY issues inherent to subjective and frequentist probability being both general classifiers  s2 wwE and particular theories. More specifically, adoption of artefactual a *  (2 w nd intersubjective o |2 wK probability will provide a more nuanced framework for the field to begin to  $$!2   heed the /2 w numerous calls put forth$+2  over the last twentyr  2 U -C2 f% five years for a unified approach to   s2 $wE teaching and learning probability. Furthermore, the article proposes  $ &2 $$ that artefactual  2 ]wY period be adopted as a first approximation descriptor for the next phase of probability $ 2 w  education.  2 V - 2 w -2 w  Introduction 2  -k2 C @ Jones, Langrall, and Mooneys (2007) probability chapter in the  $ $%,$$ $% $$-2 C Second  -Y2 }w4 Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Lea$*$2 }F rningd-/2 } (Lester, 2007) states:   -z2 wJ With respect to probability content, the big ideas that have emergedare /     &2- 2 w the nature of  -+2 w chance and randomnesss$-2 e , -2   sample space$-2  , -.2  probability measurement$$-22  (classical, frequentist,      -+2 )w and subjective), and n   -12 )@ probability distributions -2 )6 (p. 9  2 ) 15).  42 )= Further examination of the 9'   2 cw\ authors synthesis of (worldwide) curricula and current research in the field, coupled with     $ %              % 2 wY a strict emphasis on the probability measurement perspective, provides evidence that the t %  &&     L2 w+ big ideas that have emerged in mathematic  & && P2  . s education are the classical and frequentist       2  wT approaches to probability measurement, and not the subjective approach. This author   &&      2 H wP does not disagree with Jones, Langrall, and Mooneys point that with respect to  %   , $  P2 w. probability content subjective probability is      P2 . a big idea; rather, this author contends that       2 wS the big idea has yet to emerge. For example, subjective probability is not widely   % &      $ 2 wY represented in mathematics curricula (p. 947), and the authors were not able to locate t %&     $   D2 . w& cognitive research on the subjective a    Y2 . r4 pproach to probability (p. 925). The profundity of      2 h w^ these statements is in their simplicity. In accord with these recent findings, the purpose of  &     &     %         2 wV this paper is to (1) critique nomenclature associated with probability measurement in     &  $  &&  /2 w mathematics education, a&&    j2 r? nd (2) investigate the current state of subjective probability.             2  2  Q Probability measurement literature exists in the fields of: philosophy (Gillies, t  &&      %    2 N w 2000; Hacking, $  22 N  1975, 2001), psychology (   L2 N + Coshmides & Tooby, 1996; Gigerenzer, 1994, a!'& %   52 w 1996; Kahneman & Tversky, 19 #&&  12  82; Tversky & Kahneman 19   &#&12 n 82a, 1982b), mathematics   %&  -                           ՜.+,D՜.+,p, hp  Simon Fraser UniversityA /Mathematics Educations Unfinished Probability Title 8@ _PID_HLINKSApEOmailto:egan_chernoff@sfu.ca  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./013456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKMNOPQRSZRoot Entry Fp.\Data 1TableCWordDocument'NSummaryInformation(2p3DocumentSummaryInformation8LCompObjj  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q